Skip to main content

Full text of "Records of the Family of Urswyk, Urswick, Or Urwick"

See other formats


This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project 

to make the world's books discoverable online. 

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject 

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books 

are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover. 

Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the 

publisher to a library and finally to you. 

Usage guidelines 

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the 
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing tliis resource, we liave taken steps to 
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying. 
We also ask that you: 

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for 
personal, non-commercial purposes. 

+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine 
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the 
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help. 

+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for in forming people about this project and helping them find 
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it. 

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just 
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other 
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of 
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner 
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe. 

About Google Book Search 

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers 
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web 

at |http: //books .google .com/I 


l^arbart) CoUtgr litrtan 



'' J.-- 


» > 

/ t * 

•», f 

' ..■ "- 

W-^ ,- 


l/ysrict cidrcA t»wir 


H K O O R D 8 





Editbd by THB Bbv. WILLIAM: TJEWIOK, M.A. 

FOow oftks Soffol SistoriMl Society, Author of** The Early 
Sitiofy qf Triniiy CoOege^ Dublin^" ^. 

With Illustbations by W. H. UEWIOK 

FOlow of the Moyal Society of I^inter Btehere 


\^r- ^S"a.M o 

CC7 14 1 r» ) 


Thbss Records are based upon investigations begun by my kinsman 
Thomas Augustus Urwick about the year 1878. He gave much time to 
the pursuit during the four following years till the middle of i88z, when he 
removed with his family from London to Corfe Mullen near Wimbome in 
Dorset. Often have I spent the morning with him in the British Museum 
Library or at the Record Office ; and throughout this period we corresponded 
on the subject. As early as July, i88o» he made the following proposal : — 

<< My dear Kizifimaii, — ^Ab we have together been at some painB, with the aid of a 
few literazy friends, to collect chronicles of the old Lancashire family from whom 
there is circumstantial evidence to prove that oar Salopian forefathers were descended, 
it seems to me that to arrange those details in a readable form would be a task worthy 
the eifort, and would be far more efficiently rendered by yon. ... If your leisure 
will pennit, and you will kindly undertake this, I shall be very grateful." 

Being through other engagements unable to comply with this request, 
my kinsman himself undertook the task, and the result is the Memorial, the 
greater part of which now appears in print. 

Thomas Augustus Urwick died in 1 890, and his Manuscript, illustrated 
with old woodcuts, maps, etc., remains a precious legacy to his children. 
The suggestion to print it for the use of the family came from his brother, 
Mr. W. H. Urwick, who is associated with me in its production. My 
strong affection and esteem for our departed kinsman forbade my declining 

iv. editor's preface. 

to edit the work. Certain portions have, mainly for the sake of brevity, 
been omitted, in particular the following : — 

1. Some ooatB of arms, heraldio descriptioiiB of family quarteringB, with explanationfl. 

2. An epitome of the Ware of the Roses, battle by battle. 

3. Brief memoirs of the pablio friends of GHBiBiroFHaB TJbswxok, namely, Cuthbebt 

TosBTAUjf bishop of Durham, John Eibhbb, biahop of Rochester, Sir Thokab 
MoBB, Lord Chancellor, and Dbah Colbt. 

4. Notices of families with whom the XJrswicks were more or less remotely asaociated. 

With these omissions, the Treatise appears for the most part as it came 
from the author's pen. Very few changes, beyond obvious corrections, have 
been made. References have been verified, and when lacking, for the most 
part, and as far as could be, supplied. 

The Etchings, by the well-known and experienced hand of my esteemed 
kinsman, W. H. Urwick, add in no small degree to the interest and value 
of the book. One could almost wish that the author himself were back 
again with us, for the pleasure and satisfaction of seeing the fruits of his 
toil in print. The work stands as a fit memorial of his care, his industry, 
and his perseverance, blended with the kindly gentleness, the quiet humour, 
and the Christian simplicity that characterized him. 

William Urwick. 

49, Beltiit Fark Gardens, 
London, N. W. 
JuM, 1893. 




Editor's Prbface ---^ iii. 

I. Origin of the Family of Urswick . - - . i 


III. Foundation of Furnbss Abbby - - - - - lo 

IV. Post-mortem Inquisitions, Office of Eschabtor, &c. - 17 

V. Robert de Urswick (son of Adam), Knight of Parlia- 
ment AND Lord of Uprawcliffb 21 

VI. Walter db Urswick, of Catterick in Richmondshire - 25 

VII. Robert Urswick, of Uprawcliffb and of Badsworth, 

son of Robert of Uprawcliffb 32 

VIII. Sir Thomas Urswick, of Badsworth - - - - 39 

IX. Urswicks of Lincolnshire, Kent, and London - - 42 

X. The Urswicks of Badsworth (continued) — Robert, son 


XI. Urswicks of Lancashire and Yorkshire, coeval with 

THOSE OF Badsworth 54 

XII. Thomas Urswick, Recorder of London and afterwards 

Chief Baron of the Exchequer .... 63 

XIII. Christopher Urswick, Dean of Windsor and Rector 
OF Hackney : — 

Early Life 81 

Chaplain to the Countess of Richmond and her son - 84 

Almoner to Henry VII. with Ambassadorial functions - 88 

Canon and Dean of Windsor 95 

Friendship with Erasmus - - - - - -103 

Appointed Rector of Hackney - - - - - 107 

Letter to Thomas Goldstone - - - - - 120 

Last Will and Testament - - - - - -125 

Tomb and Inscription 132 



XrV. Dissolution of the Monastery of Furnbss - - - 140 

XV. Families with whom the Urswicks were alued : — 

Le Fleming of Aldingham, Coniston, and now of Rydal - 149 
Southworth of Samlesbuiy and Uprawcliflfe - - - 156 
Kirkbys of Kirkby Ireleth - - - - - -'59 

Le Scrope, or Le Scroop, of Bolton, Danby, Masham, and 

Upsall ---- 163 

Radcliffe (or Ratcliflfe) of Radclyffe Tower, Ordsal, &c. - 165 
Hornby of De Hornby - - - - - - -166 

Hertforth of Badsworth - - - - - - -167 

Molyneauz, or Molineux, of Sephton - - - - 168 

Redman, or Redmayne, of Levins, Westmoreland - - 169 
Vavasor, or Vavasour, of Willitoft, Spaldington, Bubwith, 

Badsworth, &c. - - - - - - - -'75 

The Haryngtons of Haverington, in Cumberland - - 177 

XVL Settlement of the Haryngtons and Urswicks in 

Shropshire 188 

XVn. The Shropshire Urwicks 209 


!• Explanation of the Brass Effigy of Christopher Urswick (given on 

opposite page) - - - -223 

2. Lambeth Survey (1650) on Urswick Church - - - _ 224 

3. Pedigrees — (i) The Hanwood and Shelton Urwicks 

(2) Urwicks of Stow-on- the- Wold 

(3) The Urwicks of Broom 

(4) Urwicks of " the Moor " 

(5) Urwicks of Beckjay 

4. List of Works from which the Records of the Urswicks have been 

drawn -- - 225 


• Urswick Church Tower 
^ Urswick Village and Tarn 


^ FuRNEss Abbey 

page s 


/ Sir Walter Urswick's Monument in ELatcerick Church - 

"^ Brasses of Sir Thomas Urswick, his wife and children 
IN Dagenham Church, Essex ..... 

v^ Christopher Urswick's Tomb in Hackney Church - 

v^Old Hackney Church Tower 

>f Round Chapel in Ludlow Castle 

•Ludlow Castle 

• Brass of Christopher Urswick upon his tomb in Hackney 
Church -- 







/The Urswick Shield, viz., Argent ^ on a bend sable^ three lozenges of the fields 
each charged with a saltire gules. 

- '1 


Origin of Hit ^umlii at Vbnittuk 

T the period of the Norman invasion, that detached 
portion of Lancashire which is bounded by the Bay of 
Morecombe, and the streams of Duddon and Winster, 
and therefore by the Monks not inaptly termed an Island^ 
fell to the lot of the Norman Knight, Sir Roger de Poitou.* 
We can scarcely venture to form an idea what the position 
of the conquered inhabitants may have been under his 
domination; in all probability, it was very fortunate for 
them, that Sir Roger, having given offence to the Eong, was 
dispossessed of that lordship, then known as Hougen^ or the 
Hill. The Manor of Aldingham, then nearly 2,500 acres in 
extent, was granted by the King to his friend Sir Michael de 

* Or Poictou. He held for a time all the lands between the Ribble and the 



Sir Michael's possessions, situated within the Urswick landsj 
and for that reason called Michael's Urswick, and afterwards 
corrupted to Much Urswick, in precisely the same way as 
al4r mentioned with repM to 1 deLtion of the .L 
Much-lands. As to the origin of the name of this yillage of 
Ueswick, it may possibly have been founded by Uese, the 
Saxon Lord, whose descendants, after the Conquest, were 
found to have settled in Somersetshire, where they held the 
great manor of Williton, having Normanized their name to 
FitzUrse, or son of Urse, but prior to this their ancestors had 
held lands in Grittleton, Wiltshire, so that the association of 
their name, - if any, with the Wykey Wtckj or village of Ursej 
must have been of a much earlier and Saxon date.* 

There remains nought to be told of old Bernulph be Urse- 
WYKE, as his Norman neighbours termed him, except that 
among his kinsfolk he was simply plain Bernulph, for the 
Saxons had hardly yet learned to realise and appreciate the 
advantages of an hereditary surname, and so at the period in 
which it came into vogue, and was universally adopted, each 
member, of a family might be named after the estate which 
he occupied, and might thus become the possessor of a family 
name distinct from that of his father. In this individual 
instance, therefore (although it would equally apply to the 
Penningtons, Bardseas, or any of their Saxon neighbours), 

• For an account of Fitzurse, see Freeman's History of the Norman Con^ 
quest. Let it be well digested, however, that the families of Urse, Fitzurse, there 
described, though possibly the builders of the rude fort of Ursewick, had naught 
to do with OUT Saxon family of Bernulf. 




the Urswicks^ as a family bearing that name, could not be 
said to have existed before the reign of Stephen. 

This, however, after a lapse of centuries, would not account 
for the comparative paucity of their descendants without a 
combination of other causes; many of them having been 
monks ; many having perished on the battle field ; while 
those whose possessed estates oft failed in heirs male, and 
the lands passed by marriage to others. 

We have no record at this early date regarding the wife 
of Bemulph, or his sons Gilbert and Adam; but Gilbert 
had a son named Gamel who had a son Adam, a name which 
was in great favour with the family, judging from its 
repetition in successive generations. This Adam, son of 
Gamel, son of Gilbert, was one of the earliest benefactors 
of the Monastery of Fumess, founded by Stephen, Earl of 
Bologne, before he was made King. 

The foundation of that Monastery, and Adam's gift to 
the same, will be spoken of presently, after a few remarks 
on the Urswick pedigree, and its author, Roger Dodswortlu 


OaER DODSWORTH was the son of Matthew 
Dodfiworth, Registrar of York Cathedral ; he was 
born on the 2-Ath July, 1586, died in August, 1664, 
and wfliis buried at Rufford, Lancashire ; he was a man of 
wonderful industry, always collecting and transcribing, but 
^ever publishing anything. His Voluminous manuscripts, con- 
sisting df 122 volumes of his own writing, besides original 
collections amounting in all to 162 volumes folio, were 
presented to the Bodleian Library at Oxford by his great 
patron, Thomas Lord Fairfax, the well-known Parliamentary 

To Dodsworth we are indebted for the most extended 
pedigree of the Urswick family apparently extant, but it 
is very incomplete. 

DodstV'orth^s interest in the Urswicks seems to have con- 
sii^ted in their connexion with his own family through the 
medium of the Hertforths, and the Thoresbys ; having shewn 
this, he relinquishes the task^ only bringing into prominence 
the Lords of Uprawcliffe and Badsworth, which estates they 
held for two generations each, and quite ignoring junior 
members of the family, who also made their mark in history. 
We here subjoin an abridged form of the pedigree, adding 
in Italics other members of the family mentioned in various 


An Abridgement of Roger Dodsworth*s Pedigree of the Urswicki^, 
omitting the collateral branches of Banastre or Banister, Balderston, Thoresby, 
Branthwait, &c., and annexing some omissions in italics. 

N.B. — ^Abbreviation — m,, married ; d., daughter ; A., heir or heiress. 

King Stephen, Asax (son of Gaxbl, son of Gussbt, son of Bbbhulph), benefactor of 

Fumess Abbey, had two soiib and a danghter. 

I AUan de Urawick, Monk. 

died S.P., he confiimed hie 

father's grant to the Abbot 

and Monastery. 

JoHir DB ITbswigk, 

heir of hie brother Adam, 

grantor of lands to his sister 

in marriage, had a son, 

Adax db Ubswiok, 
who held lands in Bardsea 
in wardship for Hugh de 
Bardsea. frmmess Concher, 
449). \ 

Elizabx!fk db Usswzok, 

m. Sir Bichaxd Le Fleming 

of Beckermet, Knt. 

Sir Senry de Urewiek, 

m, Anne, d, of Sir Roiert 

VM909pr, Kni.qfUarliimenif 

in 1313. 

Adax db Ubswiok. 

Obxb db Ubswiok. 

Adax db Ubswiok, 
m. Sara, d. and A. of Sir Robt. Tilliaid of Tatcham, 
and held Luddelay HaU, Stirkeland Ketel in the 
barony of Kendal. He had son and heir, and also 
Alice, wife of John Sparrow, sister of Robert. 

BoBBBT DB Ubswiok, 

who ift. Ellen, d. and h. of Wm. Sonthworth, of 

Uprawolifle; was Knt. of Parliament, Bich. 11. 

and Hen. IV.; m. Elleny d. of Rich, Radelyff^ 

probably 2nd wife, 12 July, 1395. 

Caupemanwra (Cfhaptnan or Iferbhant). 

Tho$, de Urevfiekf 

tundry eommitaione toiih 

Earl Bohwnfor King Ed, III, 

Walter de Urnoiekf 
m. a daughter of lord Serope, of 
Ifatham, wae toith John o*Oaunt 
in Spanish Ware, 


BOBBBT, A. of 

John Sparrow, 
grandson of 
John Sparrow f 
had wife, Joan, 
and died toith' 
out heirs. 


BoBEBT Ubswiok, 

' (son of Bobert) 

Sheriff of CO. Lancaster, 

was at Affinoonrt, m. 

Margaret de Hornby, 

widow of Sir Wm. 

Haryng^ton, K.G. 


Thokab ubswiok, 
A. of his brother Bobert, 
m. Johanna Hertforth. 

John Ubswiok, 

m. Constance 
Banastre, died 

witfaont iflsue. 

Johanna, Helen, 

m. John de m, Boger de 
Kirkby. Kirkby. 


Elizabeth. Margaret. Katherine. 

BoBBBT Ubswiok, 





Sn Thos. Usswiok, 

Metwder ofZotidon. IT. F/,, 

JBaron of the Exchequer , 



son of Thos., m. Kaiiherme 
Haryng^n, had d.^ Isabel 
Ubswiok, who m. Sir Wm. 

This Isabel founds a chantry 
at Badsurorih. Christopher 
Ursicick teas one of th$ 
witnesses to the foundation 


d. of Thos. Urswiok, 
m. 1st, Sir Richard 
Molineux; 2iid, Sir 
James Haryng^n. 
By 1st m. had ttco sons 
and three daughters, 
and by 2nd m. %cith 
James Haryrhgton, one 
son, Richard Saryny- 
ton, who m. Maiel 

Note. — There is an 
Edward Urswiek re- 
corded as witness to 
a deed respecting the 
Bradeschag or Brad" 
shaw estate. 

This is the extent of the pedigree furnished by Roger 
Dodsworth ; there is an ambiguity about the second named 
Robert Urswiek, Dodsworth showing that he had five 
daughters^ besides a son John (who died early), whereas a 
post-mortem inquisition of John Sparrow states that he died 
** without heirs of his body " ; nevertheless both agree that 
his brother Thomas was heir to his estates. Such was the 
attachment in those days to a Christian name, and the desire 
to retain it in a family, that not infrequently two of its 
members would be similarly baptised, in order to secure 
(against contingencies, if possible) the old association of the 
name with the heritage. Possibly this may have been the case 
in ihe generation in question, and Thomas, surviving both 
his brothers, thus became heir to both. 

We now add an appendix to the above pedigree, furnished 
by a perusal of post-mortem inquisitions, and scraps of history. 

Christopher Urswiok, of Yorkshire, had a daughter 
married to Thos. Rasby about 1470. John Urswick and his 


wife (some time attached to the Chapter of Furneas Abbey) 
had sons, viz., (John* Urswiok, who is not stated to be dead 
in 1519, but his wife Mary is shewn to be still living at that 
time), and Christopher Urswick. Archdeacon of Richmond, 
Rector of Hackney, bom 1447, died 1520-1. The Christopher 
named above was his uncle, bom about 1420. 

John Urswick and Mary his wife had a son Thomas, who 
died in 1 520, without issue, leaving a widow Elizabeth ; and 
three daughters, viz., Isabel, aged 50 at her brother's death, 
and heiress of most of his lands, she being apparently a 
spinster ; and two others whose Christian names are not 
mentioned, the wives respectively of Wm. Redmayn and Mr. 
Bentam ; so we may without running the risk of erring 
much, place the pedigree thus : — 

RoBEBT Ui^rwiaE, John Ubswiok, = and Sir Thoicas ITbswiok, 

the Recorder, who m. 

father of Isabel brother of Robert, 

de Vavasor. 


Anne Rich, and left only 
daughters oo-hedreases. 

John ubswioe sMary. Ohbzbtofhbb ITbswiok, 

Fled probably with 

Sir James Huring- 

ton after battle of 


Arohd. of Richmond, 
Dean of Windsor, &o. 

Thoxab UBSWiOEsElizabeih. Isabbl, Mrs. Redman. Mrs. Bentam. 

ob. 1619. I Spinster, I J 

No issue. aged 50 James Redman, Wm. Bentam, 

in 1520. aged 16 in 1520. aged 15 in 1520. 

a. b. 

a. b. — These were the future heirs to the eetatet of the said Thomas Urswick. 

The different members of the family shall be treated of in 
detail, after introducing the subject of the foundation of 
Fumess Abbey. 

* His name is not mentioned in the document, but as an elder son he was 
probably named after his father. '' John '' appears at Felhampton with Haxnugm 
ton 1523. 


I HIS noble pile was founded by the Charter of Stephen, 
Earl of Bologne, in the month of July, in the year 
1127. The monks who formed the establishment 
were brought from Tulket near Preston, in Amunderness, 
Westmoreland, where they had previously seated themselves 
under the direction of Evanus, who originally brought them 
from the Monastery of Savigny, in Normandy ; Stephen, in 
his Charter, bestowed all his possessions in Fumess, with the 
exception of those lands which were held by Sir Michael 
le Fleming, on this Monastery, and Sir Michael gave to the 
Abbot his two villages on the coast, viz., Ros and Crivelton, 
being convenient for their fishing, in exchange for the manors 
of Bardsea and Urswick. Sir Michael decidedly had the best 
of the bargain, for the two villages were for the most part, 
if not entirely, submerged shortly after by the encroaclmients 
of the tide, while Bardsea and Urswick remained high and 
dry. Urswick Church was not included in this transaction, 
ior the reason that the Abbot of Furness had already bestowed 


it upon his own son-in-law, Daniel, and it was therefore no 
longer his property. Wm. son of Edwd., held 60 acres of 
land in Urswick, which was granted to him by Sir Michael, 
by Charter on the young man's marriage, having been as we 
suppose, held on wardship, and for which he — William de 
Urswick — paid a rent or service of 5/- per annum. Sir 
Michael lived to a great age, and in the evening of his days, 
he gave, to the Abbot and Monastery without any reser- 
vation, his estate of Fordeboe.* 

Next on the list of benefactors comes Wm. de Lancaster, Baron of Kendal, 
who gave his lands of Scathwaite and Egton, with all appurtenances, viz., 2 
large and 2 small boats, and 40 nets for fishing in the waters of Thurston and 
Windermere ; but a strict proviso was made that any servants of the Abbey 
found trespassing within the Baron's forests should be punished at his 
discretion. It was also stipulated that at the death of the said Baron, his 
body should be interred within the presbytery of the said Abbey, and near 
to the remains of his grandfather, Wm. de Lancaster. This deed of gift, 
with its conditions, was confirmed by his widow, Lady Agnes, and dated at 
Kirkby in Kendal, on the 6th November, 1 240 , but during the Baron's life 
there had been several endowments to the Abbey from different sources. 
For instance, in 12 17, Alexander de Kirkby gave the advowson of the 
Church on his estate of Kirkby, and in 1225, a place called Setplangarthes, 
near his own Grange of Dunetholme, to the Abbot and Monastery of 
Furness, besides four hides of land in Kirkby. Then Richard de Broughton, 
of Broughton 1 ower, gave Rosthwaite Bank and other parcels of land which 
he had inherited from the Kirkby s of Kirkby Ireleth. 

Helwise, daughter of the second Lancaster, baron of .Kendal, 
gave buck, doe, and falcon, and all right to lands which her father had held 
in the precincts of the Abbey. 

* Nicolson and Burn, History of Westmoreland and' Cumber landf L 153. 


John, son and heir of Roger de Lancaster, gave all the wood, morass, and 
pasture, called Angerton Moss ; and John, son of Robert de Haryngton, 
Knight, also gave the moiety of the same which he had held, and which was 
tenanted by the Vicar of Dalton, without any reservation, viz., with free 
ingress and egress^ Adam de Huddleston confirmed the deed which had 
been made by Ralph Kirkby and Christopher Broughton with his wife 
Christian, in the preceding generation, of forty mossrooms (or pastures) 
given by them oat of their Broughton estate. 

William of Lowick, son of Robert de Turribus {t'.e,, of the Towers) gave' 
a rent of 5/- per annum out of his farm, which we may conclude to have 
been a liberal donation, considering that it was noteworthy that Stephen, 
Earl of Bologne, Moreton, and Warren gave to the Abbot of Furness 3/- 
each time that he appeared at his court. 

The Abbots of Furness claimed a right to the churches of Ulverston and 
Pennington, as dependant on the Church of Urswick, then their property, 
as before mentioned, it was at one time a subject of dispute, but apparently 
decided in their favour.* 

These few examples shew how rapidly the prosperity of 
this Monastery increased, until the Abbots were mesne lords 
of half the coimtry round. One benefaction to the Abbey 
has been purposely left until the last, although it was evidently 
of early date, in order that it might lead directly to the con- 
tinuation of the fanuly history. 

Adam de Urswick gave five hides, or about 600 acres of 
land, out of his estate in Urswick to the Abbot and Monastery 
of Furness, t and this grant was confirmed in due form at his 
father's death by the eldest son of the benefactor, also named 

• T. West, Anttquiiies 0/ Furness ^ App. xi. 
t West's Furness, edited by W. Close, p. 99. 


Allan de Urswick,* was one of twelve monks who, headed 
by Abbot Gerold, left Fumess Abbey to establish the sister 
Convent of Caldre, in Coupland, Cumberland, On the lOth of 
January, 1134, being the last year of the reign of Henry the 
L, and seven years after the foundation. 

Adam de Urswick, son of Gramelus, or Gramel de Urswicfc, 
being the Adam before mentioned who was grantor of five 
hides of land to the Monastery, held among other lands, a 
bovate of land in Much Urswyk,t of Michael, son of Wm. le 
Fleming of Aldingham. 

This Michael was the great-great-grandson of the first Sir Michael Le 
Fleming, and was unfortunately drowned in Leven Water in attempting to 
ford the sands when the tide was unfavourable. His sister Alice being sole 
heiress to his personal estate, married Richd. de Cancefield, and the 
Aldingham estate passed into that family, and from them, two generations 
later, in a similar way, viz., by marriage, to the Haryngtons, of Gleaston 

The elder branch of the family of Le Fleming thus becoming extinct, the 
descent, so far as th& patrimonial estates were concerned, was henceforth 
traced from the heirs of the second son of the first Sir Michael, viz.. Sir 
Richard of Beckermet (or Caernarvon Castle, as it was also called), and at 
the time [femp. Henry III.) the representative of this branch of the family 
was a Sir Richard of Beckermet, being the great-grandson of the Sir Richard 
above mentioned. 

Adam de Urswick had two sons and a daughter, viz., Adam, 
John, and Elizabeth. The eldest does Aot appear to have 

* See Annates Furnesienses, by T. Alcock Beck, p. 172 sqq. 

t Baines's Lancashire^ IV., 649, 650. This lease was granted on Ascension 
Dayi i6th May» 1230, i.e.^ in the fifteeneth year of the reign of Henzy IIL 




married^ at all events he left no family, and his brother 
John inherited his lands ; Elizabeth was wedded to Sir 
Richard le Fleming, and her marriage portion was the 
"Manor of Coniston.'' Her brother John also made over, 
in exchange for other lands, all the property which he held 
in Urswick, Claughton and Kemeford, and the witnesses to 
this deed were Roger de Lancaster, John de Cancefield, John 
de Kirkby, Richard de Kirkby, and others.* This union 
of Elizabeth Ueswick with Sir Richard le Fleming is 
memorialized by the representation on painted glass at 
Rydal Hiall, Westmoreland, (the present seat of the family 
of Le Fleming), of the arms of Urswick, being first on a 
list of thirteen shields of families with whom they have at 
different periods been allied. After Sir Richard's death, his 
widow Elizabeth granted to her son John all the land in 
Kemeford, being part of the estate made over to her by her 
brother. Witnesses, her said surviving brother John, Matthew 
de Redman, and Adam de Berwick. She also corroborated 
or confirmed her father's gift of land to the Abbey, in the 
presence of Sir John Huddleston, Allan de Pennington, and 
Wm. de Cancefield , knights. We learn, concerning her brother 
John, that a son of his, viz., Adam, father of Adam and 
Orme, h?A the wardship of the person and estates of Hugh, 
son and heir of Adam de Bardsea, (during that young 
gentleman's minority), which office was released to him by 
the Abbot of Fumess; among other lands, he held con- 

• Nicolson and Bums, I., 155. Coucher Book of Fumess (Atkioson), p. y^. 


jointly with Nichola49 Preston,* vicar of Kirkby-Stephen, 
12 acres of arable land, 6 of meadow, and 6 of pasture with 
appurtenances, and these they together granted to another 
member of the Preston family, and more than 200 years later 
the title to these lands was disputed by Nicholas Haryngton 
with a Richard Preston, their descendant ; the matter was, 
however, decided by arbitration, and the old deed being 
produced, Haryngton failed to substantiate his claim. 

One fact with regard to Adam Urswick^s gift to the Abbey 
must not be omitted, viz., the arms of the family were, with 
those of other benefactors, depicted on the noble east window, 
which is stated to have been rescued from destruction, and 
conveyed to Bowness Church, Windermere, while others 
dispute the point, and say that the window there shewn was 
brought from Cartmel Priory, f 

To return to John de Urswick, he had a son Adam (who 

• The Prestons were a Westmoreland family, whose descendants after the Dis- 
solution purchased the site of Fumess Abbey from the trustees of the Crown* 
We get no records of Sir Henry Urswick, Knt., but those mentioned on the 
pedigree, his father-in-law. Sir Robt. Vavasor, was son of Sir Wm. Vavasor by 
Constance, daughter of Sir Wm. Mowbray, Knt. 

t The first conjecture is probably the true one. The picture in the second light 
on the left above the Urswick arms is described by some as intended to represent 
the Entry into Jerusalem, a notion utterly fanciful and untenable. There are 
four figures, two and two engaged in conversation ; ist on the left a monk with 
cowl speaking with (2nd) a bearded man sitting high in yellow with hat on, and 
holding a roll in both hands. 3rd, a monk with cowl conversing with (4th) a 
figure seemingly a lady, a female face. Above is a small portrait of a lady, head 
and bust. The picture is probably intended to represent the gifts of the Urswicks, 
Elizabeth Urswick in particular, to the Abbey. 


held the wardship of Hugh Bardsea), and this Adam had two 
sons, viz., Adam and Orme« Orme gave to the Abbot ^^ a 
mossroQm " in Kellet, which gift was confirmed in the next 
generation by (apparently) his nephew, John Caupemanwre 
de Urswick.* 

And now we come to Adam, brother of Orme, son of Adam, 
the last of that name on record, ^^ Robert " becoming now the 
favourite name for three generations. 

This last named Adam de Urswick was, in the year 1332, 
being the sixth of the reign of Edward the III., appointed 
chief f cn^ester of Bowland, or as some render it. Constable of 
Bowland Forest; in 1343 he married Sara, daughter and 
heiress of Robert Tilliard, Esq., of Tatham,t and had a grant 
of land from the barony of Kendal, and the tenement of 
Luddelay Hall, in Strickland i Kettle, about two miles south 
west of Kendal. His pout mortem Inquisition § gives evidence 
that he died a few days after the 2dth of September in the 
year 1361, and that his son Robert succeeded to his estates. 
A few words of explanation as to the nature and meaning of 
these post mortem Inquisitions will not be out of place. 

* '* John Caupemanura (chapman or merchant), son of Adam de Urswick, 
confirmed to the Monks of Fumess the moss-room in Kellet which Orme de Kellet 
had given them." West's Furness, App. no. xi. 19. 

t Tatham, within a mile of Hornby ; the Haryngtons had a ** fair manor 
house " there. 

X Then spelt Stirkeland Ketel ; Stirkeland, land of Stirkes, Stires, or Steers ; 
see Stiresacre, Garstang, folios 83 and 117 

$ The Ini|ttisition was taken a few days before the aand December, viz,, about 
3 months after his death. 

I p PI 


|HE Post-mortem Inquisition, or Enquiry, was a 
necessary ceremony in those feudal times, when a 
testator had neither the knowledge nor power to 
dispose of his own property, so varied were the conditions of 
tenure. It was conducted by a Jury of no determinate 
number ; it might be twelve, more, or less, and attended by 
an officer of the King, styled Eschaetor, who watched the 
proceedings on behalf of the Orowtiy and whose business it was 
to determine if the property of the deceased or any portion 
of it might revert thereto, either from his having died 
without heirs, or having been an alien, or guilty of treason. - 
If none of these causes existed, or if the estates were held not 
immediately of the king, but of some lesser lord, the disposi- 
tion of the estates, and the appointment of a guai*dian for the 
heir (if a minor), would be determined by the Jury, who 
were impanelled by the Sheriff of the county. 

The office of Eschaetor was, like that of Sheriff, only 
tenable for a year ; they were sometimes called officers of 


record ; the king, could make no seizure until an Eschaetor 
had been appointed, nor could he^ by the law of the land, 
grant or bestow any estates until his own title to the same 
had been proved by an Inquisition, In the 32nd year of the 
reign of Henry the 8th (1540) a court of wards and liveries 
was instituted to superintend and regulate these Inquisitions. 
This was abolished in the reign of Charles the 2nd; together 
with the tenures upon which it was found. 

In the feudal times, or days of chivalry (as we love to call 
them), lands were held either by knightly^ military, or menial 
service ; or else by a payment of rent in silver coin, or white 
rent as it was termed. Tenants of the latter class were called 
Socmen, and were spoken of as holding their lands in socage ; 
but this was not in all cases an annual^ but a quit rent, by 
which the socman shewed his subjection to the king, but was 
in other respects in the position of a freeholder. Edward the 
1st established a law by which each possessor of 20 acres of 
land was compelled to take out patents of knighthood, bear a 
shield of arms, and furnish his quota of men for military 
service as often as needed. In later times, this law only 
applied to the possessors of 40 acres, but as it often proved 
an expensive ceremony to the landowner, and in times of 
peace was superfluous, the law was abolished, and a light tax 
substituted by Edward the 6th in the first year of his reign. 

Besides that of Eschaetor, another important magisterial 
office was that of Receiver of the king's rents, revenues, fines, 
forfeitures, and assessments. And in both appointments we find 


the Urswicks of Yorkshire on several occasions after the 
period at which we again take up their history^ viz.^ at the 
death of Adam de Urswick. By whose " Inquisition taken at 

* Kyrkeby in Kendal ''* it is shewn that " upon his death he 
^was seized in his demesne as of fee of a tenement in 
^ Stirkeland Ketel which he held of the king m capite^ value 
*in all issues 30s.," and that he "died on the Tuesday 
^ following the feast of St. Michael, viz., 25th September, and 

* that Robert de Ursewykk was his son and next heir, and 
^ aged 25 years and more.'' 

Thomas Ueswick, coeval with, and probably a brother of 
Adam now deceased, is described t as having formed one of 
the suite of Wm. de Bohun, shortly after he was made Earl 
of Northampton by King Edward the 3rd, viz., on the 3rd of 
October, 1337, on which occasion an expedition was formed 
under the EarPs command to try conditions with Philip of 
France, wHch, so far as any pacific arrangements were con- 
cemed, proved unavailing, for warlike measures were speedily 
adopted between the two countries; the EarPs retinue 
consisted of John Fitzwalter and 63 others, viz., nobles, 
knights, and gentlemen, among whom we find the names of 
Thomas de Urswick and Matthew de Redman contiguously 
entered on the list. 

On the 23rd of May, in the following year, 1338, Earl 

• Record Office, Chancery Inq. p.m. 35, E. III., Part 2, No. 88, taken on the 
Saturday before the feast of St. Thos. the Apostle {i,e,, 22 Dec.) in the year i36i, 

t See Rymer's Feeder a. 


Bohun being again despatched across the sea in the king's 
service, Thomas was again one of 74 who accompanied him. 

In 1342, our Edward the 3rd having in the interim assumed 
the title of King of France, the Earl was in command of a 
fleet to convey reinforcements to Brittany, and in February 
of that year Thomas Urswick had several commissions with 
Walter Derleston, Roger Power, and Walter de Betell, to 
provide ships for the undertaking, to be in readiness to sail 
from Orwell (Ipswich Water or Harwich Harbour) on the 
27th of March ; and in the same year he had to convey 40 
ships laden with wine from Great Yarmouth to Newcastle- 
upon-Tyne, to be safely bestowed and strongly fortified there 
by order of the ^king. 

That is all we are able to gather of this Thomas Urswick, 
though it is undoubtedly but a small sample of his knightly 
services, and we return to Robert, son of Adam, and heir to 
his estates. 


%oxh xrf S^patojcMe. 

S it will be presently seen that according to the 
Post-mortem Inquisitions of this Eobert; and also of 
his son, they each had a wife Joan or Johanna^ and 
as further we have no authority for disputing the authenticity 
of Mr. Dodsworth's pedigree, it becomes evident that there 
were at least two Eobert Urswicks living at the same time in 
each of these two successive generations. 

Speaking then of the first of these two generations, it is 
useless to attempt to determine whether Sir Eobert of Upraw- 
cliffe W6U3 really the Knight of Parliament — or his first cousin 
Eobert — supposing, in fact, that Adam and his brother 
Thomas had each a son Eobert, which name was handed 
down in both branches. The pedigree portion of the family 
refers to the estate of Uprawcliffe, and in the next descent to 
that of Badsworth ; other members of the family appear to 
have held sundry knightly and magisterial offices, such as 
Eschsetors, Eeceivers, Constables of Bowland Forest, etc. 

Sir Eobert Urswick obtained the Manor of Upper Eaw^ 


cliffe or UprawclifPe, by marriage with Helen, daughter 
of Sir William Southworth (47 E. III., 1373), who had 
inherited it from the Ciouplands, and it remained with the 
Urswicks mitil two generations later, when it passed by 
marriage to the Kirkbys of Kirkby. Rawcliffe^ as it is now 
called, is situated on the north side of the river Wyre, in the 
same township as the village of St. Michaels. 

Sir Robert also held, by power of attorney from Margaret, 
daughter of Wm. de Hornby (afterwards married to his son 
Robert), an estate called Asthorpe, or East Thorpe, in Lincoln 
(1382). He was also guardian (1397) of Joan, daughter of 
Roger Hertf orth of Badsworth (who afterwards married his 
other son Thomas). 

There is a marriage recorded between a Robert Urswick 
and Ellen, daughter of Richd. Radcly£Pe, dated 1 2th July, 
18 Ric. n.* (1394), but this probably refers to the other 
Robert of same period, who filled various offices in company 
with his brother Walter and one of the RadclyfPs, as foresters 
of Rowland. 

Sir Robert Urswick, as Knight of the Shire, was an 
instance of long and continuous service, almost unexampled, 
as the following parliamentary returns for the county of 
Lancaster, sending two members at each session, wiU show :— 

• Rtchd. the 2nd. His first wife, Anne, daughter of Chas. FV., King of 
Bohemia, was an ardent disciple of Wickliffe. After her death many Bohemian 
students visited Oxford, and many English visited Prague University. Among 
the Bohemians came Jerome Faulfisch, who, like John Huss, was a vigorous 
preacher of the Lollard doctrines. 


" At Westminster," 24th April, 1379, Nicholas de Haryngton 

and Robert de Uboewyk. 
16th January, 1380, name of first Euiight illegible, and Thos. 

de SoTHEWOBTH, Robert Urswick's brother-in-law. 
5th November, 1380, Do. and Do. 
I6th September, 1381, prorogued to 3rd November, William 

de Atherton and Robebtus de Ubcewyk. 
6th October, 1382, Johannes Assheton and Robebtus 

26th October, 1383, Waltebus Ubsewyk is here named in the 

place of Robert ; Willielmus Tunstall is the other Knight. 
20th October, 1385, Robebtus Ubswtk and Thomas de Rad- 

10th November, 1386, Nicholas de Haveiyngton or Haryngton 

and another. 
12th November, 1390, Robbbtus de Ubsewyk and Johannes 

de Croft. 
3rd November, 1391, Robebtus de Ubswyk and Robertus de 

20th January, 1393, Robebtus de Ubsewyk and Rodulphus 

de Ipr^. 
27th January, 1394, Robebtus de Ubswyk and Thomas 

27th January, 1395, Robebtus de Ubswyk and Thomas de 

22nd January, 1397, Robebtus de Ubswyk and Ricardus 



17th September, 1397, prorogued to 27th January, 1398, at 

Shrewsbury, [name illegible] and Adulphus de Radeclyf . 

6th October, 1399, Robektus de Urswte and Henricus de 

Lastly, 27th October, 1400 (at York), and prorogued to 20th 
January, 1401 (at Westminster), Robebtus de IJbswte 
and Nicholas de Atherton. 
Robert had a sister Alice, who married a Mr. John Sparrow, 
who had large possessions in Dorset and Somerset, which 
eyentually came to his (Robert's) son through failure of male 
issue in the Sparrow family. 

If the post-mortem Inquisition which here follows does refer 
to the above Robert, Knight of Parliament, it follows that 
he must have twice married ; and his second wife was named 
Joan, and he must have almost died in harness ; for we find 
him sitting in the House in January, 1401; and dying in 
September of same year, aged 66. 

Chancery Inq. p.m. 4, Henry IV., No. 15. 
(Record Office, Fetter Lane, London.) 

Inquisition taken at Allerton on Friday, the feast of St. Bartholomew, 
4 Henry IV. (Allerton, Yorkshire, 24th August, 1402). 

The Jury say that Robert Urswik, Chivaler, held at the time of his death, 
conjointly with Joan, his wife, 20 marks annual rent, arising from the 
Wapentake of Langbergh, &c., by the gift of Thomas Longley, Clerk. To 
have etc. to the said Robert and Joan and the heirs of their bodies, and in 
default of issue to the right heirs of Robert for ever. The said rent is held 
of the King by Knight's service : Robert died on Wednesday before the feast 
of St. Michael ; Robert de Urswyk is his son and next heir, and is aged 
50 years and more. 




WnlUx ht S^rsfo^k 0f (Kattmck in ^u\manhl\im. 

EFOEE treating of Robert Urswyk, aged 30 years 
and upwards at his father's death in 1401, his uncle 
Walter, although not heir to any irreat estate, so far 
« .ppe«,, yet Lkiaglu. mark in h«o^ « . bra™ ^oldiar, 
claims our attention. 

As a youthful squire he was engaged by ^' John of Gaunt, 
time-honour'd Lancaster/' to attend him on his Spanish 
Expedition, undertaken to replace on the throne of Castile 
the tyrant Pedro, in the room of the people's favourite 
Trastamare, and if we seek for the motive by which so brave 
a man, the supporter of the persecuted Wickliffe, and the 
patron of our poet Chaucer, could be moved to apparently so 
jmwoTtiij an enterprise, we find our answer in the feet that 
the Duke speedily after his victories, secured the hand of 


Don Pedro'B daughter,* and thus obtained for himself the 
kingdom of Castile. 

This expedition resulted in the battle of Najara, fought in 
the year 1367, by an army of 30,000 men under the Duke of 
Lancaster, called John of Gant, or Graunt,t and Edward the 
Black Prince, and a force of 100,000 led by Henry of 
Trastamare, and which ended in a complete victory for the 
English. Don Pedro had been forced from the throne by the 
aid of Bang Charles the 5th. of France, who was not actuated 
by any particular sympathy for the troubles of the CastiHans, 
but was desirous of finding employment for a great multitude 
of mercenary troops, or free companies, who were committing 
great depredations in his country. 

Walter de Uhswye did such signal service at the battle of 
Najara,j: that he there earned his silver spurs, and was 
knighted on the field, and on his return to his native land, 
had a further and more substantial reward for his bravery in 

* Constance, daughter of Don Pedro, king of Leon and Castile, was John o' 
Gaunt' s 2nd wife, she died 1393. His first wife was Blanch, sister of Matilda, 
duchess of Bavaria, she died in 1369. John o' Gaunt died in 1399, aged 63, i.e.^ 
February, 1399. 

t Or Ghent. Among the knights with the Duke of Lancaster are named Lord 
Wm. Beauchamp, Sir Ralph Camoirs, Sir Walter Urswick, Sir Robt. Someri, Sir 
John Grandesson, Sir John Draper, &c., and 200 knights and squires in all, see 
Barnes' Hist, of Edw. the IIL, folios 705 to 711, for a full description of the battle. 

X This battle was fought between Najara and Navaret in the province of Rioxa, 
in old Castile, on Saturday, the 3rd of April, 1367. Vast numbers trying to escape 
lidm the Duke's forces, were drowned in the Great River, which ran red with the 
t»lood of the slain. 


the form of a grant from the Duke. The deed; translated 
from the quaint Norman French of the period, runs thus : — 

"John, son of the noble King of England, Duke of Lancaster, &c., &c„ 
to all whom these letters may concern, greeting I Know you that for the 
good and friendly service which our well-beloved Master Walter de Urswick 
has done us in our expedition to Spain, and for others he will render in time 
to come, and also to enable him the better to maintain the order of knight- 
hood which he took of us on the day of the battle of Najara, we have giv^n 
and granted to him for the term of his. life £j^o a year, to be taken, year by 
year, in round sums, at the hands of our general Receiver for the time being 
out of the issues of our Manors of Katterick and Forcet, in our county of 

Here follows a legal formula qualifying Sir Walter to 
distrain upon the said manors for his annuity^ in the event of 
at any time the said issues (or rents) being two months in 
arrears. Now as we find in the next generation a Robert and 
Thomas Urswick, occupying the position of receivers of rents 
for the Duke of Lancaster in the Forest of Bowland (and 
ibis was in the years 1422 and 1423), it is exceedingly 
probable that in Sir Walter's time his brother Robert held 
this office of receiver for the Duke, and thus his brother 
Walter's interests would be well secured. The deed of grant 
to Sir Walter terminates as follows : — 

** In testimony of above we have affixed our letters patent, sealed with our 
private seal. Given at our Castle of Hertford this 22nd day of November 
in the 41st year of the reign of our respected sire and parent the King." 

In the year 1371 Sir Walter was made Constable of Rich- 
mond Castle, and although on the 25th of June, 1372, John, 


Duke of Lancaster, and now King of CSastilei surrendered the 
Earldom of Richmond to his father the King, we have no 
reason to suppose that Sir Walter's interests suffered thereby. 
He was then guardian of the forest of Bowland, or the New 
Forest J as it is elsewhere termed, and his companion in o£Bice 
was Thomas William Parker, of Gheshunt ; and although this 
gentleman held a second position at that period, the names of 
the Parkers of Cheshunt, Browsholm,* &c., hare been, as 
Foresters of Bowland, handed down to posterity, while that 
of Urswick has been buried in obliyion. 

The character of the latter family seems to have been a 
disposition to disregard or retire from the fruits of their 
industry ; and obscurity, if heartUy desired, is easily earned. 

On the 15th of September, 1374, Sir Wauter de Urswjke is instnicted 
" to deliver as much venison to the gentry of the neighbourhood as could 
be conveniently spared " ; and this suggests the necessity of extreme 
caution on the part of Sir Walter as to what the requirements of Royalty 
might prove to be. (Whitaker^s Clithtroe^ III. 344, 355). 

On the 15th of April, 1380, being then Master Forester of Blackburn- 
shire, he is appointed chief warden of the chases of Trawdtn^ PtndUf 
Xossendel, Tottington, and HoddUsdon. 

By a warrant dated ist of April, 1382, Sir Walter has to deliver 6 oaks fit 
for building, and in the year 1383 there is a commission to Walter SLnd 
Robert Urswic, Thomas Redcliffe, and other magistrates, to enquire into 
certain offences and disturbances committed within the forests of Bowland, 
Pendle, Rossendel, Trawden, and Tottington. 

* Arms a chevron between 3 bucks' heads cabossed. The arms of 
** Needham," quartered with ** Thos. Urswick," the Recorder, etc., were a bend 
engrailed between 2 bucks* heads cabossed, showing an association between the 
families with regard to their device. 


On the 6th of March, 1386, John of Gaunt, King of Castile, made 
another expedition into Spain, and Sir Walter de Urswyk's name occurs, 
with 247 other knights and gentlemen, who, under the conduct of John 
Chatterton, John Brown of Latham, Sir Hugh de Despenses, and Sir Philip 
Okore, formed his retinue on that occasion. 

These are the only records which appear to be extant of 
the ^^ sundry offices "* held by Sir Walter de Urswick ; they 
are taken from Rymer's Foedera^ and Whitaker's Historiea of 
Whalley and Richmondshire. Probably the reward which the 
youthful Walter, just returned from the wars as a " conquering 
hero," most valued was the hand of the fair daughter of Lord 
Scrope of Masham. 

As to the date of Walter's death we fail to find any note, 
but a handsome monument in the form of a recumbent 
statue of a knight in armour was erected to his memory, and 
stood within an arch in the south aisle of Katterick Church, 
which was rebuilt in 1412. If Sir Walter survived this 
period, he would probably be about 75 years of age, other- 
wise his tomb was removed from the old building. 

In another part of the* church, viz., on a window of the 
chancel, are also depicted the arms of Urswick, " 3 lozenges 
on a bend,"t with another shield, viz., "per fesse gules and 

• '' JDiversa officiay See Calendar ium Rotulorum Patentium^ British 
Museum Library. 

t Also a crest, viz., '* A Ram's head, barry of six." In later years we find 
the Urswick' s bearing the **Percy" or ** Northumberland" crest of a <^' Lion 
statant " on a " cap of maintenance," indicating that they were followers of that 


argent, in chief a demi lion rampant, in base a rose counter- 
changed.'' Also on another shield the same arms impaling 
that of the Burgh* family. Likewise the inscriptioni Super 
tumulum cujusdam equitis armati Urzunc^ which intimates that 
below this chancel window was the original . position of 
Urswick's tomb, and that on the chancel being at some period 
restored or rebuilt, it was removed to its present one in the 
south aisle. This is further suggested by the masonry 
surrounding the tomb, which is more modem in appearance, 
as if belonging to the 15ih centuiy. It bears the arms of 
Urswick impaling Scrope, besides those shields separately. 
The other unknown shield, and that of De Burgh, breathe 
tales of knightly alliances of which we get no record; so 
little was known, south of the Don, of this family of Urswick 
that a writer in The Gentleman^ ^ Magazine (volume 75, part 2, 
page 705), attempting to describe the tomb, makes a guess at 
five different family names to account for ^^ the lozenges on a 
bend," but it is needless to add, not the right one. We are 
indebted to the late Bev* James Raine, Canon of York, for 
the most graphic description extant 

Bilatiog upon the subject of Bowland Forest, he speaks of 
it as ^^an immense tract of wild, unenclosed moorland^ 
stretching from the northern bank of the Swale, a mile or 
two above Richmond, by Barningham Bowes, and Stainmore 
to the Tees, and extending westward through Ark^igarthdale 
to the boundsries of RicfamondBhire in that direction." 

• Arms of Burgh : " Argent, on a saltire sable, 5 swans of the field.*' 


^^ Here, in the bcief xutervuls o£ peace, and at appointed times 
and places, would the population of the district meet, to hunt 
the wolf, the wild boar, and the stag, in the suite of their 
Lord. Foxes and hares might be roused from their hiding 
places during the chase, but such small deer were unheeded 
by the Earl* and his hounds : they followed nobler game ; 
and fancy can picture the stirring of a wolf from her cave 
within the old British hold beneath Applegarth rock, and 
the echoing of hound and horn mingled with the mixed 
cries of assembled hundreds for many a long mile, until he » 
was fairly himted down within the ruined briar-dad walls of 

Canon Baine favours us in his book with a sketch of 
Urswick's tomb, an etching of which is here presented. 

Thus much for our'old ancestor, Sir Walter ; we know not 
what family he had, or if he had anp. The Robert, who is 
evidently "one too many" for Dodsworth, may have been 
his son, but throwing ofE idle conjectures, we pass to Robert, 
son of Robert. 

• John of Gaunt, Ea7'l of Richmond, Du^e of Lancaster. 



Robert ^rsfoirk, of SSlgratoriiffe anb of gab^toort^, sow of 

gobtrt, of %raJoriiffe. 

JjHE scraps of history which we cull from the works of 
Baines and Whitaker, the evidence of one (and one 
only) post-mortem Inquisition, and the pedigree, as 
set forth by Dodsworth, ai'e very conflicting with regard to 
this Robert, son of Robert. The confusion has been caused 
by a desire to form a compact pedigree, and records which 
refer to two, if not more, individuals, have been concentrated 
upon one. 

Preferring doubt, to a reckless setting aside of any member 
of the family of whom we find any mention, for the reason 
that his identity presents a difficulty, let us place in order as 
to date, what we gather of these Roberts, co-existent and 
co-eval as they were, and leave their exact relationship to 
each other for wiser heads to determine. Such was the 


attachment to a ChriBtian name among old Saxon famflies, 
that it was not an unfrequent custom to name two sons after 
their father, in order to insure so far as possible (in the event 
of the decease of one) the descent of an hereditary estate to 
one who bore it. It seems to have met with very partial 
success, however, and must cause great confusion in tracing 

Sir Robert Urswick of UprawclifP obtained an additional 
estate of a moiety of UprawclifE by marriage with Margaret, 
daughter of Sir Wm. de Hornby of Uprawcliffe, but it does 
not clearly appear by what arrangement he also held a 
portion of the Badsworth estate, which belonged to his 
brother. The fact that Robert and Thomas each held a 
moiety of Badsworth, was stated by William Trigott, baiIi£E 
of the honor of Pontefract. 

Robert and his wife, Margaret, obtained either by purchase 
of, or by an exchange with, Wm. Wike of York and Beatrice 
his wife, ten bovates* of land in Willitoft and Spaldington. 
This was in the year 1391 or 1392. Welightoft (as we have 
it in the old spelling) and Spaldington were two contiguous 
estates, 4 or 5 miles distant from Howden, East Riding of 
Yorkshire. The Vavasours had halls in both, so late as 
Charles the 1 st ; so probably they inherited them with other 
lands from the Urswicks. 

In 1401 we find Sir Robert and Sir Thomas both residing 
on their estates at Badsworth. 

* About 200 acres or more ; historians differ as to the bovate. 


In 1415 Sir Robert is appointed High SherifE of the county 
of Lancaster, and again in 1418 he is re-appointed, giving 
evidence that this Sir Robert came scathless from the battle- 
' field, for in 1415, the first year of his appointment, the famous 
battle of Agincourt was fought. For it Sir Robert Urswick, 
in his capacity of SherifE, had to provide 500 archers ; so he 
covenanted with nine other knights, each to have 50 under 
his command, while he, Robert, led 50 himself. Among, or 
rather, we should say, chief of, his fellow-leaders were, his 
brother Thomas, Sir John Southworth, Sir James Haryngton, 
John de Stanley, Richard de Elighley, and Thos. Staunton \ 
the latter appears to have aided him in his official as well as 
his military capacity as sub-sherifE, and as to his other 
comrades we can but observe the intimate connexion existing 
between them and his own family. — 

Sir John Southworth was either his ancle or, more likely, his first cousin, 
his mother being Ellen Southworth, as before shewn. — Sir James, brother of 
" Sir William Haryngton, the Standard Bearer," married Sir John South- 
worth's niece Ellen, viz., the daughter of his brother Thomas. — Of the 
noble family of Stanley, to whom John de Stanley belonged, we will speak 
hereafter ; the Haryngtons and the Stanleys were friendly then, for the time 
had not arrived when the former, by violently espousing a failing cause, 
should give the latter a pretext for usurping with royal connivance their 
confiscated property. — Richard de Kighley was apparently a brother of Sir 
Gilbert de Kighley, who, after the death of our Robert Urswick, married his 
widow Margaret. This Margaret de Hornby* must have been young when 
Robert " took her to wife," for we find that a third time she becomes a 
widow, and marries Alexander, second son of Roger de Leeds. 

* Four times married : ist to Sir Wm. Haryngton, 2nd to Sir Robt. Urswick, 
3rd to Sir Rich, de Kighley, 4th to Alex, de Leeds. 


The names of the other four knights witii whom Sir Robert 
contracted or corenanted to supply the 500 archers^ we hare 
not yet discoyered. 

WiB must now leave this " Robert) son of Robert/' and 
shew by a post-mortem Inquisition how by the death of Mr. 
John SparroWi his kinsman Robert, son of Robert de Urswicki 
to whom the said Inquisition refers, and who consequently 
cannot be the same whom we have been describing, '^did 
inherit sundry estates in Dorset and Somerset''; and it 
further states that he, Robert, dying without issue on the 
3rd November, 1420, his brother Thomas became heir to the 
said estates. 


The Inquisition for the Dorset estate is taken at Bridport, and is dated a 
few days before the feast of the Nativity of St. John the Baptist In 1421; 
it sets forth that the Jury assembled, viz., Wm. Serle, Lawrence Elle- 
worth, Heniy Colemour, Wm. atte Naysh, Alex. Hasard, Richard Crowche, 
John Hanekokkes, John atte Hyde, Nicholas Gele, John Shawe, Robert 
Godewyne, and Thomas Richeman, declared upon their oath that the said 
Robert Urswick^ when he died, held no lands in Dorset, but that John 
Sparrow, his kinsman, who deceased before him, had numerous small 
estates, to which the said Robert was hetr, and to prove his rights, or rather 
the rights of his brother Thomas, they are there assembled. First they 
state, that John Sparrow had held of the king in free burgage* a curtilage 
and a toft in the town of Sbafton [t\e., Shaftesbury], 3 messuages, 3 
cottages, and 4 acres of land in Sherborne and Vynland, an acre of meadow 
in Yetminster, 2 messuages and 16^ acres of land at a place called Hywysh, 
near Yetminster, held of different lords, and variously underlet. Also, it 

* ** Free burgage " held by an established rent, and not by menial service. 
" Curtilage," courtyard or land adjoining a dwelling, ** Toft," waste plot where 
a dwelling has stood. 


was determined by a Jury, consisting of John Goodman, John Gove, John 
Rosch, Richard Bagot, Adam Palmer, John Mede, Richard Bole,- Wm- 
Hiberd, and Rich. Matthew, who a few days after the feast of St. Barnabas 
again met at Chard, that the said John Sparrow had held in the coanty of 
Somerset, viz., i toft and 4 acres in some place which is illegible, 2 mes- 
suages and a dovecote in Milbomeport, 12 messuages and 3 acres in 
Lamport,* i messuage and 2 acres in Kingston and Yeovil, besides 5 mes- 
suages in Yeovil, 6 messuages in Stoford,t 26 acres in Berwick, a messuage 
and 10 acres in Alvington, 5 messuages and a hundred and . . . .{ acres in 
Hardington, i messuages and 51 acres in North Ferret, and i messuage 
and 14 acres in ... 4 

It appears that Robert Urswick having inherited all these 
properties in the two counties, bestowed them upon one 
John Lever, whether by sale, or lease, or only in trust, we 
cannot tell, but this John Lever, for some cause, relinquished 
his hold of them, and they were seized by one John Stourton 
on the 2nd of June, 1418; in the words of the original 
document, ^^ he had intruded himself " upon these houses and 
lands, and there is little doubt that it was a case of disputed 
inheritance ; that John Stourton was acting in behalf of the 
kinsfolk of the late John Sparrow ; and that the Juries which 
now assembled had for their object the protection of the 
rights, real or supposed, of Thomas Urswick, as heir of his 
brother Robert, now deceased. 

By an Inquisition taken on the death of John Sparrow in 
1417, a Jury had determined that one AUce Aubyn was the 
rightful heiress ; in the following year, 1418, another was 
held at Bolton in Lancashire, when Robebt Uhswick was 

* Langport. f Stoford was in the hundred of Cumington. t Illegible. 



declared to be the rightful heir ;♦ but how the matter was 
finally settled, we have no means of forming a conjecture. 
We are not informed as to Alice Aubyn's maiden name, but 
it was not Sparrow, so it is unimportant ; this is the relative 
position of the Urswicks and the Sparrows, with regard to 
the marriage already spoken of between Adam Urswick^s 
daughter, Alice, and the former John Sparrow, which will 
enable the reader to form his own conjectures. 

The *' tenants in chiefs of these estates were first the ** King/* then Thos. de 
Lancaster, Duke of Clarence, Thos. de Beaufort, Duke of Exeter, Thos. de 
Langley, Bishop of Durham, John, Duke of Bedford, and Humphrey, Duke of 
Gloucester. The ** tefiants in fee** were Robert and Thos. Urswick, and with 
respect to the estates in " Dorset," dlso^okny son of yohn de Southworth, was a 
joint heir, viz., also a tenant in fee, or copyholder. See below, Southworth of 


Adah Ubswiok 
and his wife Sara. 


Alice ubswioz 

and her husband, 

John Sparrow. 


and his wife, Ellen. 


Joan csparrow 
and her husband . . 

Alice . . . 
who married John 
Anbyn of Weston; 
was the Claimant. 

TV c' 

John Sparrow 
and his wife . . 

RoBEBT a= Joan, 
no issue, 
died 1420. 


brother and 

heir of Robert. 

John Sparrow, 

no issue, died in 

1417; whosd 

property was 

here m depute. 

And now to return to the other Robert, son of Robert, who 
wedded Margaret de Hornby, and was holding Uprawcliffe 
and part of Badsworth. According to Dodsworth, he had 

* See Towneley's Abstracts of Lancashire Inquisitions. 


a son, John, but the date shews this to be erroneous, viz., 
^^ Richard the 2nd/' for these were his grandfather's days; 
and this John, who married in Henry the 4th's reign 
Constance, the daughter and heiress of Edward Banaster, 
must have been a brother or a cousin, and not a son, of the 
Robert of whom we are now speaking. This John is said to 
have died without issue. 

It seems, however, that Robert had five daughters, viz., 
Johanna, Helen, Elizabeth, Margaret, and Katherine. 

These were co-heiresses of the UprawolifPe estate. 

Johanna married John, 4th son of Richard Eirkby, of 
Kirkby Ireleth, and 

Helen married another brother, viz., Roger de Kirkby, and 
by these combinations the whole of the estate of UprawclifFe, 
so far as the Urswicks had been possessors, passed into the 
family of Earkby ; of the two daughters, 

Elizabeth and Margaret^ no records have come to light, but 
in all probability ; 

Katherine was the dame who in after-years was in trouble 
about her property in G-arstang,* of which ^* Thomas Urswick, 
Chief-Baron of the Exchequer," had been trustee, and was 
constrained to appeal to the Lord Chancellor for the recovery 
of her title deeds after the decease of the said ^^ Thomas 

• See Suit of Dame Katherine Urswick, mentioned below. 


Sir ^Igisvasi^i Strsfoxck of $H)^si0orti|^« 

IE Thomas Urswick, heir of his brother Robert's 
moiety of Badsworth, in addition to his own, which 
he obtained by marriage with Johanna Hertforth, 
daughter and heiress of Roger Hertforth of Badsworth, was 
Knight of Parliament in 1422, according to Dodsworth, 
who also shews that at an earlier date, viz., 1417, he 
filled the office of Justice of the Peace. Wilson's pedigree 
in Leeds library represents him as Knight of Parliament in 
1441, but that is somewhat doubtful, although he was still 
living and holding his estate of Badsworth at that time. We 
have no entry of the date of his marriage with Johanna 

Two of the offspring of that union were Robert and Ullen. 
Robert * married Katherine, daughter of Sir Thomas Harjug- 
ton, of Brierley, and Mien was first wedded to Sir Richard 
Molineux, son and heir of Sir William, who was son and heir 
of Sir John Molineux, living in the reign of Edward the 3rd. 
By Sir Richard, Ellen had two sons and three daughters, and 
becoming a widow in the year 1397, was afterwards married 

• Robert Urswick of Badsworth, High Sheriff, 1466. 


to Sir James Haryngton, a younger brother of Sir Thomas 
of Brierley. On the occasion of this her second marriage 
Ellen seems to have been well dowered, for we find the 
following " Fine," dated the year 1406, " Between Sir James 
de Haryngton, Plaintif (which in these documents signifies 
the party who either purchases or accepts the property as a 
gift), and Thomas de Urswick with Johanna his wife, 
Deforciants (tU., vendors or, in this case, grantors of the 
same), of messuages and lands in Wessington and Barning- 
ham, and also of a moiety of the Badsworth estate, known as 

The only issue of this second marriage, of which we have 
any note, was Richard Haryngton, who afterwards married 
Mabel Bradeshage, or Bradshaw, of Bradeschag, of whom we 
will treat when speaking of the rest of the Haryngton family. 
In a record of a Deed connected with the Bradeschag estate, 
probably a marriage settlement, an Edward Urswick is one 
of the witnesses. But to return to old Sir Thomas, of 
Badsworth (and we say old advisedly, for although no post- 
mortem Inquisition seems to be extant to determine the length 
of his life, he was upwards of 60 in 1441). When receiver 
of rents for the Duchy of Lancaster in the forest of Bowland, 
an office which he had held conjointly with his brother 
during his lifetime, and now some two years after Robert's 
death) we find him * stiU fulfilling these functions, for in 
1423 we have a note that, as receiver of Clitheroe, he has to 

* WhitaJcer's *' History of Whaliey/' 


expend the sum of £6 17s« lid. on repairs and impro Yemenis 
in the park of Ightenhill,* and £1 10s. 4d. for fences and 

In 14249t on the occasion of a dispute arising between the 
Abbot of Furness and Sir Richard Kirkby concerning some 
lands in Angerton Moss, Sir Thomas Ueswick was one of a 
party of knights and gentlemen assembled at the Abbey to 
arbitrate in the matter. Angerton Moss had been originally 
granted by the Lancaster family to the Abbots and Monastery, 
but the Haryngtons, Blirkbys, and others who had held 
portions of it, and been themselves benefactors, still retained 
an interest in the estate, and possibly the Lord Abbot (Robert) 
may have been a little too grasping in his claims. Sir 
Thomas would be likely to favour the views of Sir Richard 
Kirkby, as the father of the two gentlemen who had married 
his nieces Johanna and Helen in 1410 and 1412. 

On the death of Sir Thomas, his son Robert became heir 
of Badsworth. 

* Ightenhill is separated from the forest of Pendle by the Calder, and is one of 

the demesnes of Clitheroe Castle ; a soft and gentle swell of ground, rising from 

a curvature of the river, not to any considerable height, as its name might lead 

one to suppose, yet commanding some very pleasing views to the north and west. 

Within this park was formerly a very ancient manor-house, belonging to the 

Lacies, and dating its existence as early as 1176. The tradition is, that the 

house was abandoned by the family on account of the untimely death of the heirs 

of Henry de Lacy of Pontefract Castle. Edmund, the eldest son, perished in his 

childhood by falling down a well at Denbigh Castle, and John, being heir succes- 

aivQ, while yet a boy, running on a turret of Pontefract Castle in the year 1282, 

fell, and was killed. 

t Beck's Annales Furnesienses. 


;N Berry's Dictionary of ArmSy we find Urswtke or 
Urswesx of Lincoln. We gain no tidings of them 
beyond the fact already stated, viz., that a Robert 
Urswick held by power of attorney the estate of Asthorpe, 
in that county : and, as we do not find them in histories of 
Lincolnshire, we come to the conclusion that they were but 
temporary residents there, and that from them were in all 
probability descended the comparatively obscure branch, 
which we find in Kent, and subsequently in London, not 
becoming totally extinct until the period of the Common- 

At the time of which we have been speaking with respect 
to Sir Thomas of Badsworth, there was a daughter of one 
of these families of whose parentage we can gain no 
knowledge, her father's Christian name being lost ; but we 
have a record that ^^ Emma de Urswick " married in the reign 
of Henry the 5th (or thereabouts ; at all events, not earlier) 


a Mr. Ancher, of a Kentish family ; and this Emma Urswick 
bore, either by grant or assumption (instead of her old 
paternal shield) the arms of Crisp of Thanet, viz., *^ Ermine, 
a fess cheeky, argent and sable.'' We are led to suppose that 
she was probably an orphan, and an adopted daughter of 
Squire Crisp of Thanet, that Mr. Anchor was a kinsman of 
Mr. Crisp, and the latter having no heirs, excepting his 
adopted daughter " Emma de Urswick," the family shield 
became attached to her dower. Mr. Ancher and his wife 
Emma had issue one daughter, who married a Mr. Draper ; 
they had a son Thomas Draper, of Flintham, Nottingham- 
shire, whose grandson was Sir Christopher Draper, a member 
of the Ironmongers' Company, and Lord Mayor of London 
in 1567. This Sir Christopher Draper bore on his escutcheon 
two shields of arms for Draper, one for Ancher, and one, 
viz., the arms already described, for Urswick. Again, we 
find that one of the female descendants of Sir Christopher 
Draper, having married into tho family of Sir Edward 
Bowyer Smijth, of Hill Hall, Essex, Bart., Sir Edward bore, 
among 70 quarterings, the same shield for Urswick. This 
blind adherence to an adopted emblazonment, having no 
historical association with the Urswick family, seems another 
instance of the obscurity of their history. 

By an old document * preserved in the British Museum, it 
is shewn that one Williaai Ursewyk held conjointly with 
Wm. Wyman, Esq., and Geoffrey Withyn, certain lands in 

• Seal xxxii. 51. 


Modyngham and elsewhere in the parish of Chiselhnrst, 
Kent, which were conveyed to them by Agnes, wife of Thos. 
Caveler, Esq., of Hobury. This seal, as it is termed, bears 
the date 12th November, I. Henry VI.,, 1422. 

Although their professional career drew Sir Thomas 
Urswick, the Recorder, and the more famous Dean 
Christopher, to the Metropolis, we should not be well-advised 
in placing either of these in the catagory of the distinct 
branch above named, their records showing obviously 
their connexion and association with the UprawcliflPe and 
Badsworth family ; there was, however, in the reign of 
Henry the 7th, one Nicholas Urswick, appointed Rector of 
St. Nicolas Aeon, upon the resignation of Thos. Chancellar, 
on the 19th December, 1497, which living he held until his 
death, and was succeeded on the 4th of April, 1506, by 
John Dowman,* This Church has been for some years 
demolished, but the burial ground still remains on the west 
side of Nicholas Lane, Lombard Street. When only a few 
years since another of our time-honoured places of worship 
was doomed to destruction, the well-preserved registers of 
St. Dionis Backchurch, Lime Street, were carefully copied 
by Mr. Joseph Eades, who has given the following entries, 
viz.. The burial of Chrystian Urswick, who died the 2Cth of 
June, 1540; the marriage of Thomas Urswick to Margaret 

• Newcourt's Re^ertoriuviy I. 505. Nicholas Urswick also, from the 9th 
May, 1502, until his death in 1506, held the Rectory of Hockwold, near Brandon 
in Norfolk. See Blomefield*s History of Norfolk. 


Halyday* on the 4th October, 1540, and the burial of Thos. 
Urswick, 13th October, 1549. 

The last and only remaining record which we have 
succeeded in discovering of this branch of the old family, 
and which kept the name in its uncorrupted form, is that of 
John Urswick, merchant tailor, who, in the reign of 
Charles I., brought an action for the recoveiy of a debt 
against a Mr. Thomas Tuke.** 


Wgt J&XBbxtln of ^absfomrt]^ (canttnne^)— Robert, mxi wa'b 

IR Robert URSWiCK,t of Badsworth, was Sheriff of 
Lancaster in 1466. He married Katherine, fifth and 
youngest daughter of Sir Thomas Haryngton,J of 
Brierley, who died of his wounds the day after the battle of 
Wakefield. Sir Robert had one only daughter, Isabel, who 
became heiress of her father's estate of Badsworth, and 
married Sir William Vavasor, § of Bubwith, and thus the 
property passed into the family of Vavasor, until Philip 

* Bai:ton Haliday, or Holyday, son of a tailor, was bom in 1593, in a house 
opposite Lincoln College, Oxford. He graduated B.A. of Christ Church 1615 ; 
in 161 8 went to Spain as chaplain to Sir Fr. Stewart; became Archdeacon of 
Oxford 1626. Approved by the Triers, Cromwell gave him the Rectory of Chilton 
in Berks, whence he was ejected in 1660 to make way for the old incumbent. 
For a list of his works, see Wood's Athenae Oxon, 

♦• Chancery B. and A., Carl. I. U.U., No. 9 (58), Record Office. 

t Robert was one of the executors of Thomas, Baron of Exchequer in 1479. 

J See Haryngton, below. 5 See Vavasor or Vavasour. 


Vavasor^ a great grandson of Sir William, setfled it on hit 
brother-in-laWy Thomas Dolman, Esq.* 

Mr. Hmiter, in his history of South Yorkshire, states that 
Isabel de Vavasor having died without issue, a claim was set 
up by one of the heirs of her great uncle, Robert, which 
proved unavailing; this great uncle was Robert of Uprawcliffe 
and Badsworth already spoken of, but as Mr. Hunter does 
not give us a reference, we have no means of discovering 
who this unsuccessful claimant was, whether a son, or 
daughter, or one more distantly akin. Hunter also says 
that, prior to this, the Urswicks had found disturbers of their 
possessions in' the persons of Thomas Broket and his wife 
Dionysia, whose claim was founded on a grant stated to have 
been made by one Roger Folyfait (a co-heir of one of the 
Nevile family) to Alan Folyfait and his wife Euphemia. 

It was alleged that Alan and Euphemia had a son, John ; 
that John had a sister, Emosia, who was his heiress ; that 
Emosia had a son and heir, William ; and that the plaintiff 
Dionysia was daughter and heiress of the said William. The 
issue of the action appears, however, for that time to have 
been in favour of the Urswicks. Isabel de Vavasor, having 
no family, devoted a portion of her wealth to the foundation 

* Robert Dolman, of Badsworth, gentlen^, was among the list of adherents 
to the King in the time of the Civil Wars, and by an Act passed in 165a, his 
estates were sold, and Col. Bright, of Carbrook, Sheffield, an officer in the 
Parliament army, became the purchaser. He abandoned his hereditary seat of 
Carbrook, settled at Badsworth, was made a baronet soon after the Restoration, 
died and was buried at Badsworth the year of the Revolution. 


of a chantry in the Church of Badsworth. The Charter is 
preserved in the Record Office ; it is written in Latin, and for 
a translation of it we are indebted to the late John Robert 
Daniel Tyssen, Esq. 

Being a curiosity in its way, we give a copy of the 
deed. Mr. Hunter has only favoured us with an abridge- 
ment, but he introduces it with the following remarks on 
Badsworth Church : '^ There has unfortunately been a time 
when this Church was doomed to be renovated^ and no eye 
upon the renovation which was familiar with the forms of 
tibese venerable edifices: the porch was entirely removed; 
the side windows of the nave through which light was 
admitted over the north and south aisles, were blocked up, 
and other alterations were made: in its original state it 
must have been a favourable specimen of the village church 
of what we may call the second order, without transepts but 
with side aisles, and a wide east window. The present 
edifice probably belongs to the age of Edward the 3rd, and 
must have taken the place of a much older Saxon church, 
with which it has nothing in common." The windows still 
exhibit, in addition to the arms of Swillington, Balderston, 
&c., those of Urswick and Hertforth.* **In Dodsworth's 
time there was also in a north window the arms of Urswick 
impaling Hertforth, also Urswick impaling Haryngton, and 
Vavasor impaling Urswick." " There were also the figures 

* Hertforth, " argent^ a lion rampant/' an extinct line« but we find the Talbots 
Of Bashall bore ** gules, a lion rampant." 


of a knight in armour haying the anns of Vayawr on his 
breaaty and of a lady haying the anns of Vayasor impaling 
Urswick, and on Mr. Dolman's stall there were also the arms 
of Yayasor impaling Urswick, Vayasor impaling Gktscoign, 
and Urswick impaling Haryngton." ^' These were part of 
the preparation made for one of those priyate seryices called 
chantries, which were founded in this Church by William 
Vayasour and Isabel his wife.'' 

The foundation charter was enrolled in the Court of the 
Duchy of Lancaster, and a copy thereof was taken in the 
19th year of the reign of Queen Elizabeth, of which the 
following is a translation from the Latin : — 
Duchy of Lancaster Registers, y. 26/L' — 1 September, 1510. 

Foundation of Chantry in Church of Badsworth by Isabella, 
daughter of Robert Urswick and wife of William Vayasour. 

"In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy 
Ghost, Amen. To all sons of Holy Mother Church to whom 
this present writing * Tripartite indented ' shall come. 

"Christopher Ursswtk, Clerk, late Archdeacon of Rich- 
mond, James Haryngton, Clerk, Dean of the Cathedral Church 
of Saint Peter of York, and Rector of the Parish Church of 
Baddesworth, Edward Redmayn, Esq., Thomas Langton, 
Esq., and John Challoner, feoffees [or trustees] of Isabella 
Vavasour, late wife of William Vavasour, late of Baddes- 
worth, daughter and heir of Robert Ursswyk, Esquire, for 
performing and fulfilling the last Will of the same Isabella, 
greeting in the Lord everlasting. 


^^ To the praise and honour of God and of the Blessed Virgin 
Mary, Mother of our Lord Jesus Christ, and of all Saints, 
and that Divine worship especially in the Parish Church of 
the Blessed Virgin Mary of Baddesworth in the diocese of 
York may be the more augmented and made more famous. 
Hence it is that we, the aforesaid Christopher Ursswyk, 
James Haryngton, Edward Redmayn, Thomas Langton, and 
John Chaloner, according to the tenour, force, form, and 
effect of the last Will of the aforesaid Isabella, lately made 
with the assent, and also the Will of the aforesaid William 

"Do will and ordain that there be one secular Chaplain, able 
and fitting, not elsewhere beneficed, to celebrate masses and 
other Divine services at the Altar of Saint Ann, situate in the 
North arch in the Parish Church of Baddesworth aforesaid 
for ever for the souls of the aforesaid William and Isabella, 
late his wife, and for the souls of Robert Ursswyk, Esquire, 
and Ejltherine his wife, parents of the same Isabella, of 
Thomas Ursswyk, Esq., grandfather of the same Isabella, 
and Joan, his wife, and also for the souls of all the ancestors, 
parents, and benefactors of the aforesaid Isabella and of all 
the faithful departed. 

"Also we will and ordain that the said Chaplain and his 
successors shall celebrate a Mass of Requiem once in every 
week for ever. They shall also say Placebo and Dirige 
aocording to the course and use of the Cathedral' Church- 
above said. And likewise that they shall turn themselves to 



the people at their first washing in each of their masses and 
shall say De profundis^ exhorting the people standing round 
about devoutly to pray for the souls above named for the sake 
of chaiity. Also we will and ordain that the said Chaplain 
and his successors shall say this collect, Inclina Domine aurem 
tuam ad preces nostras^ &c.y in each of their masses for the 
souls above named. And likewise that every year for ever 
they shall keep the anniversary of the aforesaid Isabella on 
Tuesday next after the octaves of Easter, on which same day 
they shall distribute and bestow on the poor of the parish of 
Baddesworth aforesaid, and also for and about the expenses 
of the same anniversary decently and honourably to be kept 
as the custom is, six shillings and eight pence, by the over- 
sight of the Rector of the same Church for the time being. 

^^ Also we will and ordain that the said Chaplain and his 
successors shall be sufficiently instructed in plain song and 
grammar, and that on all Lord's Days and Feast Days they 
shall personally be present in the choir of the said Church of 
Baddesworth at the times of matins, masses, vespers, and 
compline and of other Divine services, vested in their 
surplices, that they may read and sing as it shall seem to the 
Rector of the same Church decently and fitting to be ex- 
pedient, obeying the same Rector and his successors in all 
lawful and honest things within the same Church for ever. 
And that they shall not absent themselves from the said 
Church of Baddesworth beyond the space of one month at 
one time or at various times to be numbered every year at 


the most, and this by no means without the license of the 
said Rector and his successors under pain of removal from 
their office aforesaid. Also we will and ordain that the said 
Chaplain and his successors shall by no means play at dice 
and other unlawful and prohibited games, except in the 
twelve days after the feast of the Nativity of our Lord next 
following. And that they shall by no means frequent 
taverns and the houses of ale-sellers at an unfitting time; 
that is, in summer-time from the feast of the Annunciation of 
the Blessed Virgin Mary until the feast of the Nativity of the 
same after ten o'clock in the afternoon, and in winter-time 
that is to say from the feast of the Nativity of the Blessed 
Virgin Mary until the feast of the Annunciation of the same 
after nine o'clock in the afternoon, under pain of removal 
from their office and service aforesaid. Also we will and 
ordain that the said Chaplain and his successors shall not 
alienate, pledge, nor remove all the things, books, jewels, and 
ornaments to the said service appertaining; but shall preserve 
and make new all such things, books, jewels, and ornaments 
at their own charges as often and whenever it shall be 
necessary and opportune. And if the same Chaplain or his 
successors shall destroy, damage, alienate, or not sufficiently 
repair and presei-ve any goods, things, jewels, buildings, lands, 
or tenements to the said service appertaining, then he shall 
be removed from and utterly deprived of the said service by 
the Rector of the Church. . . . Also we will and ordain that 
Roger Wodde, priest, shall be the first Chaplain. 


" As often as it shall happen any persons enfeoffed in the 
£aid messuages to depart from this life so that there shall not 
)be more than one or two of the same, so often the chaplain 
fihall require them to renew and cause to be enfeoffed others 
of the more noble discreet and able parishioners of Baddes- 
worth to the number of twelve of whom we will and ordain 
one for ever to be the Rector. And so on infinitely and 
for ever in future times renewing and new maJdng the 
feoffments ; that so this our present ordinance may obtain 
the force of perpetual validity. 

"We will also and ordain that, the aforesaid Chaplain and 
his successors at their first entry to the service aforesaid and 
before they shall receive any profit of the said lands and 
tenements, shall take a corporal oath before the Rector of the 
Church of Baddesworth aforesaid for the time being, that 
they shall well and faithfully observe, keep, and perform all 
and singular the premises howsoever incumbent on them as 
far as human frailty permits it. And to him who shall keep 
the premises untouched and inviolate, be perpetual peace, 
eternal salvation, pardon of sins, and continual perseverance 
in good works. And let him who shall presume to infringe 
them, be anathema and excommunicated of Christ and all 
saints, and let his days be few, unless he chpose quickly to 
repent. In witness of all and singular which things to all 
and singular the parts of this our present writing, tripartite 
indented, we have affixed our seals. Dated on the first day 
of September in the year of our Lord one thousand five 


hundred and ten^ and in the second year of the reign of Eang 
Henry the Eighth after the Conquest of England." 

By the above document the three generations of the family 
of Urswick who held lands in Badsworth are clearly set f orth, 
and it corroborates that portion of the pedigree drawn by 
Roger Dodsworth) shewing that the Badsworth line became 
extinct in the person of Isabel de Yavasor. 

It appears that this was not the first instance of the 
Vavasours having held lands in Badsworth, for in 1312 a 
postmortem Inquisition of William le Vavasor shewed that he 
had been in possession of a messuage and 80 acres of land 
there ; but this was a small estate and not to be compared 
with that which Isabel inherited from her father Robert 
Urswick, and which now remained, as already stated, in the 
possession of the Vavasours for three generations. Isabel 
must, however, have made some provision in respect to these 
estates, in favour of her kinsman, Christopheb, for he speaks 
in his letter to Lord Darcy of his ** Manor of Badsworth." 

If the Urswicks had any further claim upon that estate 
after this period, it does not distinctly appear. We are only 
informed • that an heir of Isabel's great imcle Robert did 
make some claim, and failed to substantiate it. 

The few junior members of the family of whom we have 
records, with the exception of Sir Thomas, the Recorder, and 
Christopher, Archdeacon of Richmond, &c., offer but little 
'that can prove interesting ; still, as they may possibly lead to 
further enlightenment, we shall here carefully detail them. 


Srstoicb of $Hn£Es|rire atitr ^axhlsxxt, totiml ittjUg ilgo^t 

oi ^vdinbtsxtlj. 

R. MARSHALL'S Oeneahgist informs us that Mr. 
John Rasby (whose wife was Margaret, daughter 
of Brian Bamfield, Esq.) appointed in his will 
(dated at York, 12th November, 1466, and proved on the 6th 
December following) that he was to be buried in the Church 
of St. Peter the Apostle, at Eirk Smeton, and that his son, 
Brian Rasby, and John HesiU, of Kirk Smeton, were to be 
his executors, and (1) Thomas Ubswick, Armiger^* the super- 
visor of his will. 

This was very probably the Thomas who was afterwards 
Common Serjeant of London, then Recorder, and finally 
Chief Baron of the Exchequer, and who was now acting in 
his legal capacity to which he had been trained, but in which 
the writer of Foss's Judges affirms that he did not attain to 
much celebrity, being more of a soldier than a lawyer, or 
something to that effect ; let us leave him for the present, 

* Armiger, or gentleman qualified to bear. arms. 


and note that Brian Rasby (by his wife Agnes, daughter of 
Thomas Morley) had a son, Thomas Rasby, who married a 
daughter of one Christopher Urswick ; — a careful calculation, 
and allowing 30 years between each generation where dates 
fail, will shew this Christopher Urswick to have been one 
generation earlier than Christopher the Archdeacon of 

There is an Inquisition after the death of Thomas Urswick, 
of Lancashire, dated 1519 (in which year our Archdeacon 
Christopher was aged 72), naming ^^ Christopher Urswick, 
ClerkJ^ We find the connection with the Redman family in 
both instances, viz., in the will of Rector Urswick, and in 
the Inquisition here named, the former speaking of his 
" nephew William Redman," and the latter shewing a similar 

Concerning the Risby or Rasby family, we find that John Risby, Esq., 
had the presentation of the rectory of Badsworth in the year 1474, and 
appointed James Banastre as rector. The Haryngtons were then in power, 
and possibly this John Risby was in some way allied with that family, as we 
find Thomas Rasby to have been (viz., by marriage) with that of the 
Urswicks about the time in which this presentation occurred. There can 
be very little doubt as to the names of Risby and Rasby being identical in 
that locality, although the Risbys, so spelt, are a Suffolk family. The name 
has also been corrupted to Rusby. Mr. James Rusby, F.R.H.S., has traced 
his descent from the old Yorkshire family; he has kindly aided us on 
several occasions by directing attention to certain manuscripts and records 
of the Urswicks, which possibly would otherwise have been overlooked. 

(2) In the year 1454 being the 33rd year of the reign of 
Henry the 6th, we have a writ of sunmions issued by one 


Thomas Ubswyk^ ^^^m fti^d it is imponUe to fix his identity 
with any other Thomas before namedL Katharina, then of 
age, is shewn to be tike daogfater of Robert, not of Thomas, 
and a later Eotthaiine, dangfater of Thomasy afterwards 
Becorder, was at tiiis date an infant of some three years. 

The docoment, bom the Becord Office, nms as follows: — 

''York. De Banco Ron. Hilary term, 33 H. VI., m. 257d. 

'' Thomas Ubswtk, Esquire, and Kathariiib Ubswtk, 
daughter of the said Thomas, by tibeir attcumey, appear oa 
Hie fourth day against Robert WortLsy, of Tankeialey in the 
oounty aforesaid. Esquire, of a plea that he render to them 
mzty shillings which he owes them and unjustly detaina. 
And he comes not. And it ia commanded to Hie Sheriff that 
be do summon lum, &c. And tiie Sheriff now wtoms that 
he summoned, &c. 

^^ Judgement : let him be attached, that he be here from 
tiie day of Easter in 15 days." 

With regard to thu familj of Wortlat or Wortlxt, we leam tbat w&en, 
about the end of the twelfth century, the Flemings founded the Benedictine 
nnnnery of Kirklees, Nicholas, son of Alan de Wortley, was (as a feudal 
dependant) one of the witnesses to the Charter ; and from him descended a 
long line of Wortleys, the heir of the family always bearing the name of 
Nicholas, nntil after the death of Nicholas de Wortley in 1448. Isabel, 
daoghter of Thos. Wortley, married in the year 1471 the hefr of John 
Talbot, of Thornton, a descendant of the Talbots of Bashall. 

(3) Although not in chronological order, yet while on the 
aubjeet of these last Uiawicks of the North, we viil bnng 
their records to a eooclusion by here placing the foii-marUm 


Inqnisitioii of Thomas UbswicKi of Lancashire (in whose 
person the male line of that branch appears to have become 
extinct), before entering upon those of the " Recorder," and 
the "Rector of Hackney," two men very opposite in 
olMuracter, yet closely aldn : the one an astute, though 
apparently not very learned, lawyer, a man of war from hie 
youth, fond of hard blows, and a determined Yorkist ; the 
other a man of much learning, mild and gentle of mien, yef 
courageous withal^ a careful and subtle diplomatist, a lover 
and promoter of peace, and a faithful and devoted servant to 
the Lancastrian cause; and it is noteworthy that in these 
two men we find again instances, as in Sir Walter, of younger 
and non-inheriting sons havmg made the widest mark in 

Duchy of Lancaster. InqoisitkMi P.M. Vol. 5, No. 17. 1520. 
Tkomas ) Be it remembered that at Lincoln on the 3rd day of April 10 
Urswyk. ) the i ith year of the reign of King Henry the Eighth, thia oSism 
was delivered into the Chancery of the Duchy of Lancaster* 
Inqoisition indented taken at Lancaster in the county of Lancaster oa 
the 22nd day of March in the nth year of the reign of King Henry th# 
Eighth, before James Worsley» Esq., Eschoetor of the said Lord the King 
in the county aforesaid, by virtue of a writ of the same Lord the King of 
dtem clausit extremum^ to the same Eschoetor directed and to this Inquisi- 
tion,, annexed by the oath of Thomas Wrigjityngton, John Newport, Esquire^ 
Thoa. Holt, Kijq., Richard Rishton, William Travers, Francis Morlej, 

* IHem clausit exiremum^ a wcit empfeyed when the deceased had held lands 
m^mj^iUj ue., immediately qI the King, as was here the case with regard tathe 
in Over-Kellet. A writ of this nature was lo be granted at the suit of the 
kexc, who, on attaining Us msyori^, would have to sue for '^livery*' or 
delivery of the lands out of the King's hands. 


William Weston, Brian Pane, Esq., Wm. Issherwode, Henry Orrell, Wm. 
Johnson, Thos. Penketh, James Anderton, and Robert Molyneux, who say 
by their oath that Thomas Urswtk, in the said Writ named, long before 
his death was seized, of and in, one messuage and tenement called 
Thrynkeld* in Forneys in the county aforesaid, and of six acres of land 
with all other and singular their appurtenances. And also of and in two 
messuages and ten acres of land with appurts. in Mtkkyl Urstvyk in 
Foumeys aforesaid. And also of and in one enclosure called Kirkflatte in 
LMe Urswyk in Fourneys afd. with appurts. in his demesne as of fee. And 
also of and in the reversion of all lands, tenements, rents, reversions, and 
services with all and singular their appurts. in Over-Kellet in the county 
afd., which Mary, mother of the said Thomas held in dower and for term of 
her life the reversion thereof belonging to the afd. Thomas and his heirs. 
And further the Jurors afd. say that Roland Prestonf and Robert Saulle 
were seized of and in three messuages and 30 acres of land with appurts. 
late in the tenure of Henry Myddyffett, John Douy, and Robert Sadler, in 
Ulverston in Foumeys in the county of Lancaster^ and of and in two acres of 
land in Rossett, and of one enclosure called Mowtohow in Ulverston in 
Foumeys in the county afd. And also of and in eight acres of land in 
Saynton [Stainton] in the county afd. in their demesne as of fee. 

And so being seized thereof they gave and granted all the aforesaid 
messuages, lands, tenements, and other the premises with their appurts. to 
the afd. Thomas Urswyk and Elizabbth his wife and the heirs of the 

• Thrynkeld, or Trinckeld, in Fumess. 

t The Prestons were originally of Levens, Westmoreland, and of Preston 
Patrick, and of the Manor and Abbey after the Dissolution. They were at 
different periods allied with the families of Banastre, Bardsea, Middleton, Lay* 
bourne, Lord Mounteagle, Lamplough, Cancefield, &c., also after the Dissolution 
to those of Kirkby, Redman, Westby of Moubrick, &c., also in 17th century to 
those of Molineux, Lord Herbert, Lord Clifford, &c. A younger branch of this 
family were of Holker in Cumberland, which became extinct in 1756; the elder 
branch by the female line is continued in the noble families of Herbert and 


body of the same Thomas Urswyk issuing : which same Elizabeth is inTuU 
life. By virtue of which same gift the afd. Thomas and Elizabeth fiis 
wife were thereof seized. And afterwards the afd. Thomas Urswyk being 
seized of such estate thereof, of all the premises with appurts., all and 
singular the messuages, lands, tenements, and reversions with appurts., for a 
certain sum of money in hand paid to the same Thomas by William 
Redmayn, Esq., sold all the afd. lands, tenements, rents, reversions, uses 
and services with all and singular their appurts. to the afd. William 
Redmayn. And by his certain Charter thereof made he gave and granted 
all the premises with appurts. to one Master Christopher Urswtk, Clerk, 
and to the aforesaid William Redmayn in fee to the use of the same William 
and his heirs, as by that Charter shewn to the Jurors afd. upon the taking 
of this Inquisition in evidence manifestly appears. By virtue of which 
same sale and feoffment, the aforesaid Christopher Urswyk, Clerk, and 
William Redmayn were seized* in their demesne as of fee of and in all the 
afd. messuages, lands, tenements, rents, reversions, and services, with all and 
singular, dec, in their demesne as of fee to the behoof and use of the afd» 
William Redmayn, his heirs and assigns. And afterwards the afd. Mary, 
mother of the afd. Thomas Urswyk, being seized of all the lands and 
tenements with appurts. before named which she had and held in dower 
and for term of her life in Over-Kellet afd., gave and granted and sur- 
rendered all her estate, right, title, and interest which she had in the same 
lands and tenements afd., to the afd. William Redmayn. To which the afd. 
Wm. Redmayn agreed. By virtue whereof the said Wm. Redmayn entered 
into the premises and was thereof seized in fee, and so being seized thereof 
as it is aforesaid, he giave and granted to the afd. Mary all the afd. lands 
and tenements with appurts. in Over-Kellett afd. so surrendered to him as 
it is afd., to have and hold to her for term of her life. By virtue of which 
same demise the afd. Mary was and still is seized thereof in her demesne as 

•"Seized in** or "came into possession of.** "Demesne as of fee,'* i.e., 
Demesne held of some superior lord by rent or service; but hereditary, i.e., 
similar to copyhold. 


of free tenement : and further the Jurors afd. way that the afd. Thos. 
Urswtk was seized on the day on which he died of and in sixty acres of 
land and sixty acres of pasture with apports. in Ohenion in Foumeys afd. • 
and also of and in one small dose called the S^till with all the land 
called the SptttiU-land in Umqyk afd., in his demesne as of fee-tail, that is 
to say to him and his heirs male of the body of Johm Ur^swyk^ grandfidhtr 
of the said Thomas, issuing. 

And further the Jnfors afd. say by their oath that the afd. messuage and 
lands and tenements in Thrjmkeld with the afd. six acres of land with all 
spurts, are held of Henry, Earl of Wiltshire, and Cecily* his wife, SCar- 
chioness of Dorset and Lady of Haryngton, as of the right of the same 
Cecily, by what service the Jurors afd. know not« And they are worth by 
the year beyond reprisesf six shillings, and that the afd. 60 acres of land 
and 60 acres of pasture in Ulverston and Urswyk so tailed as it is aforesaid 
are held of the said Lord Henry and Cecily by fealty, and a rent of 30s. by 
the year and they are worth by the year beyond reprises 30s. And the 
Jurors afd. say that the afd. three messuages and tenements in Mykkel 
Urswyk with appurts. are held of the said Lord Henry and Cecily in the 
form afd. by what service they know not, and they are worth by the year 
beyond reprises 4s. And the Jurors afd. say that the afd. enclosure called 
the Kirkeflatte in Little Urswyk afd. is held of the Earl of Derby by what 
service the Jurors know not. And it is worth by the year 6s. beyond 
reprises. And the Jurors afd. say that the afd. messuages and lands in 
Ulverston and Staynton are held of the afd. Lord Henry and Cecily as it is 
aforesaid by what service the Jurors afd. know not, and they are worth by 
the year in all issues beyond reprises 408. 
* And the Jurors afd. say that all those lands in Over-Kellett afd. are held 

* Cecily, or Cesill, Marchioness of Dorset, Lady Harrington and Bonidlle, was 
one of the collectors of the king's revenues in the county of Salop in 1509. See 
state papers of Hen. VIIL, vol. i. par. 777, and vol. 2, part 2.\ 

t Beyond rej^ists^ i.^., after all deductions and payments have been made ; as 

rent charges, annuities, etc. 


df the lord the Eling as of his Dnchy of Lancaster by socage,* rendering to 
tiie said lord the King yearly 2s. 6d.: and they are worth by the year, &c.» 
fix pounds. 

And the afd. Jarors. say that the afd. Thomas Urswyk died on the gth day 
of July in the nth year of the reign of King Henry the Eighth, And the 
Jarors afd. say that the afd. Christopher Urswyk, Clerk^ is son and next 
heir male of the body of the afd. John Urswyk, begotten, and he is of the 
age on the day of the taking of this Inquisition of sixty years and upwards. 
And that Isabella Urswyk, sister of the afd. Thomas, James Redmayn, 
and William Bentam are next heirs general of the said Thomas Urswyk, 
and that the afd. Isabella is of the age of fifty years and above. And that 
tiie afd. James Redmayn is of the age of sixteen years. And that the afd. 
William Bentam is of the age of fifteen years on the day of the taking of 
the Inquisition aforesaid. And the afd. Jurors say that the afd. Thomas 
Urswyk did not hold any other or more lands nor tenements in demesne, 
use, reversion, or service in the county afd. of the said lord the King nor of 
any other. In witness whereof to this present Inquisition as well the 
aforesaid Eschoetor as the Jurors aforesaid have interchangeably afiixed 
Mieir seals. Given the day, year, and place above said. 

In the above Inquisition no note is made as to whether the 
&ther of the late Thomas was still living, nor is. Mary spoken 
of as a foidaw. 

This John Ubswick (son of John, and father of Thomas) 
must, however, have been supposed to be deceased, or he 
would have been heir to his father John in lieu of his brother 
Christopher. He must have been in the prime of life, when 
the battle of Bosworth Plain was fought, viz., in 1485. As 

* Socage^ or rent in lien of knightly or military service. Tenants of this kind 
were called socmen ; they were in most cases so far freeholders, that they paid 
only a qtiit-rent, or, as it was termed from the silver coin used| white-rent, in 
token of subjection to the king or other lord. 


the Rector of Hackney was, at the time of that battle, 38 
years old, his elder brother John would probably not exceed 
40 years : a good age for a man to mingle in the strife, if 
strife there must be. 

Thomas is, in this Inquisition, described as holding some 
of his lands of Lord Henry and his wife, who was Lady of 
Haryngton by fealty^ an indication, in addition to the kinship 
existing, of the attachment of the Urswicks to the fortunes 
of the house of Haryngton, although the policy of their 
brother the Rector was so completely opposed to the 
vindictive and revengeful views which the Yorkists held. 

Thomas had not been permitted to enjoy his possessions at 
Urswick and its neighbourhood quite unmolested, for we 
find, on looking into the Records of the Duchy of Lancaster ^ 
that not long before his death (and he evidently died young) 
he found it necessary to take proceedings against John 
Agreves and others for trespassing and pulling down a house, 
and for dilapidating the fences to some lands of his at 
^^ Galabere within Furness '^; but he was not more unfortunate 
than his successors in this respect, for in the same volume it 
appears that Wm. Sawrey, Vicar of Urswick, in the succeed- 
ing reign of Edward the 6th, brought an action for assault 
against ^^ Cuthbert Rigge^^ and others, and also in the year 
following (1548) against John Gemer and Margt. Backhouse, 
widow, for tortious [forcible, wrongful] possession of lands, 
called Little KirJcflat^ &c. There was a case, too, of the 
Kling versu"^ the Marquis of Dorset in a matter of disputed 


title to the messuages and lands called Trinekelde^ as well as 
right of common ; and several other disputations in which 
the names of Sawrey and also of Redman occur, which, how- 
ever, do not distinctly connect themselves with our subject. 

Isabella, spinster, mentioned in the foregoing Inquisition 
as sister of Thomas, and aged 50, was probably a god- 
daughter of Isabella Vavasour, daughter of Robert Urswick 
of Badsworth. 


VgamM UxfAxntl, "j^ttotbn at %avi)ian, n\\b nfttxiowch% 

(tlgitf §ar0n 0f Hgt ^/xtlgtqm. 

LTHOUGH we are unable to gather any history of 
his early life, the connexion of the Recorder with 
his Northern relatives, is indicated by the fact which 
will be presently shewn of a Robert Urswick having been 
one of his co-trustees with regard to lands in Essex, and also 
of Thomas having been himself trustee of a small estate at 
Garstang (which is near to Rawcliff in Lancashire, and 
probably at that time formed part of the Uprawcliff estate) 


for Katharine Urswick. We therefore infer that Thomas 
was brother to Robert of Badsworth, and that Katharine was 
the youngest of the five daughters of Robert of UprawdiGEe 
and Badsworth, as shewn in the pedigree. 

Also we find that Thomas, when he resigned the Recorder- 
ship, was succeeded in the office by a Mr, Starkey,* who 
came of a Lancashire family, friends of the Urswicks. 

Thomas first appears on the scene as " Common Serjeant '' 
of London, to which office he was appointed on the 27th 
June, 1463. On the 3rd of October, 1454, he was, for his 
prudence and ability, raised to the post of Recorder, on the 
resignation of Thos. Billing. At this time he was probably 
a widower, for the eldest of his daughters, shewn to hare 
been a nun, was the one and only offspring of an early 
marriage, and her mother was a Needhamf by birth, as the 
arms of that family are found quartered with those of Sir 
Thomas on his tomb. If we are correct in this supposition, 
then his second marriage with Anne, daughter of Richard 
Rich, a wealthy mercer of London, must have taken place in 
the year 1456 or 1457. 

By this lady he had eight daughters and four sons ; but 1^ 
some fatality he had the misfortune to lose all his boys and 
three of his daughters. His five surviving daughters were 
co-heiresses at his death of his seemingly vast estates. 

* See Letter of Lawrence Starkey to Thomas Cromwell, quoted further on. 

t "Needham/' a bend engrailed between two bucks' heads cabossed, s#c 
Heraldic Visitations of Essex, Harleian MSS. 1541, fo. 51b, 


On the 31st of July, 1458,* he was in the company of 
Richard Wydevile, of Ryvers, Sir Thos. Kyrerell, Sir Thos. 
Brown^t Thos. Kent, clerk of the council, Master John 
Derby, Doctor of Laws, and others, being commissioners to 
make enquiry concerning the sea-fight between Richard, Earl 
of Warwick, and certain persons of Lubeck, who were allies 
of the then reigning monarch, Henry the 6th. The alliance 
of Henry with Margaret of Anjou^ whose sympathies were in 
behalf of the French, made his subjects traitors to him ; for 
he was no longer King except in name, and his Queen was 
determined to contest his right to the bitter end, though he 
himself would have fain abdicated, through failing health 
both of mind and body. 

In the year 1453 when Thomas Urswick was made 
Coimnon Serjeant, it is said that the King shewed symptoms 
of mental derangement ; it is not, therefore, surprising that 
in the disturbed state of government, the rulers of the City 
should have deemed it good policy to encourage the advances 
of the House of York, in the person of Edward, Earl of 
March : he was then courteous of mien, as well as extremely 
handsome, brave withal, and had as yet shewn none of those 
vicious proclivities which developed themselves when he 
came into full power, for which, however, he deeply repented, 

* Rymer's Faedera. 

t In July, 1461, Thomas Urswick was in commission to try treasons at Guild- 
hall, when Sir Thos* Brown was convicted. See second battle of St. Albans, 
folio 93, fate of Sir Thos. Kyreil. Fosse's Judges, 


and retribution came, as we know, in the murder of his little 
sons, and the unloveable union of his daughter with the 
truimphant heir of Lancaster. 

No less than twelve of the fierce "wars of the Roses ^* 
were fought during the life of Thomas Urswyk, all, in fact, 
except the last and decisive one on Bosworth Plain, yet wei 
do not know of his immediate participation in any of them, 
as his civic appointments, no doubt, gave him other duties to 
fulfil. On two occasions, viz., immediately after the second 
battle of St. Albans (1461), being the sixth of these destructive 
wars between the rival houses, and also immediately before 
the battle of Bamet, the llih war (1471), Thomas Urswick 
made himself conspicuous by his tact and cunning in aiding 
the cause of the Yorkist faction. 

Thoicas Urswick was raised to the office of Recorder of 
the city of London on Oct. 3rd, 1455.* After the queen had 
gained the second battle of St. Albans (Bernard's Heath), and 
was approaching London, the citi2sens prevented the Lord 
Mayor from sending her a supply of provisions. The mob 
stopped the supplies at Cripplegate, exclaiming that ^^they 
would not feed those who would cut their throats and rob 
them of all that they had."t The Mayor sent Urswick the 
Recorder to the king's council at Bamet, to make his excuses, 
and to give her majesty hopes of being admitted into 
London when the Commons were appeased. *^ The Recorder 

* See the account of him by Edward Foss in his Judges of England, 
t Kennett*s History of England y B.I.j'fol. 53. 


willingly announced the stoppage of supplies^ but probably 
did not participate in the encouragement held out ; — a strong 
partisan of the Yorkist party, he knew it^ power within the 
walls, and rejoiced to see the Earl of March enter them 
shortly after, and ascend the throne as Edward IV."* 

In the first parliament of the new king Thomas Urswick 
was returned as the representative of the City, and again in 
1467, when he was one of the members selected to investigate 
the silver coinagct He still held the Recordership when 
Henry VI. re-assumed the crown ; but retaining his loyalty 
to Edward IV., he was deputed by the Mayor and Corporation 
(HI the Thursday before Eaater, 1471, at the hour of noon, to 
address the citizens, which he accordingly did to the following 
«Sect: — That all was now quiet, that there would be no 
fitting at present, and that ^^ alle the peple that were in 
hames were every manne to goo home to dynere "; it appears 
the burghers were nothing loth to obey that mandate, and so 
soon as the streets were cleared, the Recorder, accompanied 
by the Mayor and Aldermen, silently let in the Earl of March 
and his followers through a posteme gate, who straightway 
repaired to the palace of the Bishop of London, where King 
Henry was only guarded by a few ecclesiastics, and took 
prisoners both him and the Archbishop of York ; they were 
at once put in ward, but the latter was released after a two- 
days' imprisonment.:^ 

• ''Highways and Byeways,^^ in the City Press, by Aleph. 

t RoL Pari,, V. 634. 
X Warkworth Chron., 1$, 21 ; Holingshed, iii. $2^, 


. The citizens being divided in their sympathies, had a less 
artful or less expeditious policy been adopted, giving time for 
Warwick (who was advancing with his troops to London) to 
arrive, a very different result might have been expected. 

The Mayor and Aldermen were all knighted for this 
achievement, and the same honour was conferred upon the 
Recorder at a later period. 

Ten days after the battle of Tewkesbury was fought (14th 
May, 1471), Thomas Nevile of Falconbridge, who had been 
in Warwick's service, and had lost his employment at that 
nobleman's death, approached to London with 17,000 men; 
and being imable to gain the bridge, succeeded in forcing 
a detachment of his army through Aldgate,* and here our 
Recorder, Thomas Ubswick, comes into requisition, for we 
learn that ^^ being well armed in a strong jacke,"t he did 
great and efEectual service in aiding to repel this fierce attack 
of De Falconbridge. The latter, brave but unfortunate as 
his noble master, tried to escape by sea, but was captured 
and executed at Southampton. For the sevieral services 
which he had rendered, Thomas Ubswick was knighted on 
the 14th of June, and on the 22nd of May in the following 
year of 1472 (on the very day on which the ill-fated Henry 
was assassinated in the Tower,) Sir Thomas was made Chief 
Baron of the Exchequer; which office he held for the 
remainder of his life. It is intimated that this honour was 

* Rapin B. xiii. p. 615 ; HoUingshed, Stow, 
t '' Rusty aim caps, and jinglin' jackets." Robert Bums, On Cap fain Grose, 



conferred upon him more for his services as a soldier, than 
for his qualifications as a lawyer or politician ; but another 
writer states that he was in the first instance nominated 
Recorder on account of his prudence and ability ; and there 
was a tradition that he was a fluent speaker* When made 
Chief Baron, it became expedient that he should resign his 
post as Recorder, and his place was filled in that office by his 
friend from the North, Humphrey Starkey. ^^ He does not 
seem to hare taken a prominent part in the judgments of the 
Exchequer Chamber, being only mentioned in four terms in 
the fifteenth and sixteenth years during his continuance in 
office*"* Sir Thomas's fortunes, so far as worldly possessions 
without much honour were concerned, were certainly now 
consimmiated, for grants of land, and means to obtain further 
possessions, came thickly upon him. The City Corporation 
also shewed their gratitude by awarding him two pipes of 
wine per annum, and another pipe if he required it, which 
possibly he did, unless he were more self-denying and tender 
to the feelings of his benefactors than a modem citizen would 
be under such an extenuating clause. Sir Thomas and his 
lady and his tolerably large family resided at Markes Hall, 
near Romford ; it was possibly at that time a very agueish and 
far from healthy home, and this may have in some degree 
accounted for the loss in their childhood and early youth of 
his four sons and three of his daughters. He may have had 
reason to envy, in spite of his riches, the fate of his hardy 

• Foss's ytidgeSy iv. 460. 


kinsmen of the North; he could scarcely have had very 
tender feelings towards young Christopher Urswick, who was 
then in his opening manhood, sowing the seeds of diplomatic 
enterprise which would finally crush the present dynasty, 
and disarm all future antagonism^ by a matrimonial alliance 
between the hitherto hostile Houses. Yet each of these men 
was an example of the idiosyncrasy of the Saxon race from 
which they sprung; each in his cause, whether right or 
wrong, faithful and devoted. They were not wise enough to 
be time-servars, this we may say advisedly ; for Sir Thomas 
Urswick was a faithful servant of the city of London, and 
only cared for the monarch who would be recognised by it 
for the time being; and on the other hand, Christopher 
Urswick was, being a man of greater learning and higher 
aspirations, a faithful servant of his royal master (Henry 
VII.), and niever deviated from his allegiance to him, either 
as Earl or King. 

In 1476 Sir Thomas Urswick, ELnt., Sir Thos. Montgomery, 
Knt., Sir John Say, Ejit., John Elryngton, Wm. Alyngton, 
and divers others were commissioned to view, and order the 
repairs of, all the banks of the river Lea, from London to 
Ware and Hertford.* 

When he was Recorder, he probably resided at a manor 
called Ewell or Tyle House in Stepney, for in 1467 he 
conveyed that estate to one John Barcester. In connexion 
with his after-possession of Markes Hall (which was an 

• Chauncy's History of Hertfordshire ^ page 4. 


ancient building, enclosed by a moat, and not wholly pulled 
down until 1808), there were two dwellings, a windmill, 860 
acres of land, and also a rental of £5 10s. He was also the 
owner of Le Lee Hall (afterwards called Hatfield Broad Oak) 
with 300 acres, and a rental of SOs., within the township of 
Hatfield Regis ; also a tenement called Lithe Hall, with 50 
acres of land ; also the manor of Uphavering (or Gabrous) in 
Romford, consisting of 222 acres and a rental of 8s« Id. Also 
a manor called Doneres, and 15 messuages in Dagenham, 
Barking, and Colchester. Also the tenement called Plinherst 
with 30 acres, near Haveryng atte Bowre. Also the manor 
of " Achewys," now called " Mile End," which was conveyed 
to him in 1472 by one Wm. Peche. Also he held lands at 
** Halyngbury Parva," or Little HaUingbury, Bishops Stort- 
ford, Herts, and at Machyng, or " Matching," near Haiiow, 
EsseXy-^r-these were held of Anne, Duchess of Burgundy. 
These seyeral estates did Sir Thomas hold by knightly 
service, or by payment of a knighl^s fee ; some of Elizabeth, 
Edward's queen, and some of Anne, Duchess of Burgundy, 
with the right to bequeath them to his lawful heirs. 

Although Sir Thomas had such a large family, he was not 
much exceeding 60 years of age, when he died, in the year 
1479, his youngest child still an infant ; haying only survived 
for seven years his advancement to the honour of Chief 
Baron of the Exchequer. 

He lies buried at Dagenham,* in Essex, in the chancel of 

* Dagenham, 2| miles from Rainham, 5 miles from Barking, Tilbury line of railway. 


a church which has been much ^^ repaired and beautified " out 
of its original form, but the old plain altar-tomb of Sir 
Thomas Urswick has been much desecrated ; a brass, which 
would have afforded eyidence of his exact age, has been 
remoyed from the dado, and also two shields from the ledger, 
leaving, howeyer, fortunately those two remaining, which are 
the most yaluable as exhibiting the arms of Urswick in 
combination with those of ^^ Needham '' and ^^ Rich." One of 
the lost brass shields has been removed from above, the other 
from below, the figures of Sir Thomas and his lady, and the 
groups of his sons and daughters, — each on separate plates, 
but the accompanying tracing, which was taken in the year 
1849 from an illustration in a work of the Cambridge Camden 
Society, shews both the remaining brasses below the figures, 
and not as they will be seen by the visitor to the tomb. 
'' Sir Thomas* is attired in a long gown, reaching to the feet, 
and girt about the waist; over the shoulders is thrown a 
mantle, which being held up in consequence of the hands 
being raised in the attitude of prayer, displays a lining of 
silk. The hood, though a distinguishing sign of judicial 
costume, is wanting: the effigies of Judge Gascoignf at 
Harewood Church, Yorkshire, and of Sir Peter Adam in 
Sutton Church, Essex, are both supplied with this mark of 
dignity. Lady Urswick is attired in a gown, low at tlie 

• Here we quote "Aleph" City Scraps^ City Press, in his most carefully written 

t Vavasor impaling Gascoign, Badsworth Church, see above. 

li'oM.^dajlJuunautJib'if if '^U^^rUkU lr.jcl,ii ''''^^"•^ 


bosom, and yery small at the waist ; the sleeves have large 
cidSs, nearly covering the hands, which, like those of her 
husband, are placed in a devotional position; the hair is 
drawn down from the forehead, and gathered into a caul or 
cap of elaborately rich work, and is covered with one of those 
extraordinary veils, stiffened with starch and distended with 
wire, which has taken the name of the ^^ Butterfly head- 
dress ''; her neck is adorned with a rich necklace of pearls and 
jewels, and the whole figure furnishes a good specimen of the 
wonderful richness in dress for which the ladies of her age 
were famous. A pet dog lies at her feet." ^'The four 
sons, under the e£Sgy of the Baron, all wear long gowns, 
tightened by girdles, the common dress of youths of that 
period. The group of daughters present a variety of costume. 
First is a nun, who owing to her religious vocation, if alive 
at her father's death, would be deemed in law to be civilly 
dead, and could not have inherited.* The next two daughters 
are attired like their mother ; they were both married before 
their father's death ; the other daughters are depicted with 
long hair streaming down their backs, as maidens are usually 
drawn on sepulchral brasses ; to make up the number, three 
must have deceased during the Baron's life, for three imperfect 
figures are arranged in the backgroimd, and these probably 
represent this portion of the family." The two brasses of 

* In all probability, she was a novice of the Abbey of Fumess, to whicl^the 
Urswicks were deeply attached, and, no doubt, on her admission her father 
presented a handsome endowment to that monastery. 


shields now remaining are as follows : One at the head of the 
stone above the effigy of Lady Urswick, exhibiting her family 
arms, viz., '* A chevron between three cross croslets/' and one 
at the foot of the stone below the effigy of the Baron, which 
represents his old family arms, viz., "On a bend three 
lozenges ; on each lozenge a saltire or cross." And quartered 
with the arms of *^Needham,"* viz., "A bend engrailed 
between two bucks' heads cabossed," and these quarterings 
impale (that is, are united with, so as to form one shield) the 
arms of Sir Thomas's wife's family, viz., those of " Rich," a 
chevron between three cross croslets, as shewn separately 
above the figure of the lady. 

By the post-mortem Inquisition of Sir Thomas, held at 
Romford, and dated 5th Nov., 1479, it is shewn that the 
manor of Markes, and properties in Havering-atte-Bowre, 
also in Dagenham, Barking, and Colchester, had formerly been 
in the holding of one Thos. Hamesard, which estates he 
demised to Katherine, wife of Bartholomew Soman (late 
citizen and goldbeater of London) for her life, and in 
remainder to Robt. Elnolles, of Forde, Esq., and Elizabeth 
his wife ; the said Elizabeth dpng without issue, and her 
husband surviving her, he, Robert KnoUes, granted the said 
manors, lands, tenements, etc., to Thomas Ursewyce, John 
Say, John Walden, Thos. Coke, Richd. Rich, Guy Farrefay, 

* There is a record that Thomas Urswick and Richard Nedeham were co- 
trustees of some lands in the possession of the Ponynges {*^ Master Comptroller 
Ponjmgs '*), a friend of Christopher Urswick. 


and Robert UrsewtcK; as co-feoffees (or trustees). Guy 
Farrefay alone outlived Thomas Ursewyck, and became sole 
trustee and one of the executors of Sir Thomas in favour of 
his five surviving daughters, who were left co-heiresses of his 

We may as well here enumerate the family, so far as we have any records 
of them. First then, of the eldest (the nun) we can, of course, say nothing, 
as her name was buried with her when she took the veil. The second, 
Kathtrifu^ who was, at her father's death, aged 21 years and more, had been 
for some time married to a Mr. Henry Langley. Next to Katherine came 
Ralphs who had died in his childhood, but who would at this time have 
been about 20 years of age. Annt^ then aged 19, was already the wife of a 
Mr. John Doreward, or Durward, of Essex ; she appears to have shortly 
been left a widow, for we find, by an old Harleian manuscript,* that she 
became the^fe of Sir Thomas Fynes, of Claveryngham, son of Sir Richard 
Fynes, who was the Lord Dacres of the South. Joan, the wife of Sir Richard 
Fynes, was the granddaughter of Lord Dacres of the North. This Sir 
Thomas Fjmes (or Fynys) was a tenant of Christopher Urswick's benefice, 
or as he expresses it in his will, a '' farmer of his parsonage of Felpham in 
the diocese of Chichester," some few years later. 

After Anne came Margaret^ who, with her three brothers and two sisters, 
whose names are not recorded, found an early grave. We find the names 
of Ralph and Margaret, from the fact of their uncle John Rich having 
bequeathed to them at his death about 1461 or 1462, as well as their sister 
Anne, " each 5 marks for a cup at their marriage ": should we not deem it 
now a strange bequest ? Margaret was an infant, Anne and Ralph, children 
of I and 2 years. Katherine was not included in this little memento, which 
would lead one to suppose that she was own sister to the nun, the offspring 
of an early marriage, for she was then a child of 3 years old, and why 

• No. 1541 , folio 5 lb. , Visitations of Essex. See also Berry's County (of Sussex) 
Genealogies^ Brit. Mus. Lib., 2i2of., folio 331, and additional MSS. 14311, folio 7. 


should her uncle John exclude her, as the eldest of the then existing 
family ? We may form our conjectures as to the melancholy gap in the 
years before the next heiress is named, viz., Elizabeth^ who was aged 14 
years at her father's death, and we read no more of her ; then comes, with 
another gap, Jane^ aged 8 years, and who afterwards became the wife of 
John Gilborne, of York. And lastly, Mary, then an infant of 9 months, but 
who lived to be the wife of Thos. Scott (grandson of Wm. Scott, of 
Stapleford-Tany, who died and was buried there on 3rd Nov., 1491). 
Thomas Scott had an elder brother, George, who died without issue. These 
Scotts were an influential family. 

The mother (now a widow) of nearly the whole of this 
family, was, as already stated, a daughter of Richard Rich, a 
wealthy mercer of London. His father, also named Richard, 
died in 1414, and was buried in St. Lawrence Church, Ivy 
Lane : he was great grandson of John le Rich, of Riches 
Place, Hampshire, living in the reign of Edward the 2nd. 

Richard Rich, father of Anne Urswick, was Sheriif of London in 1441; 
he died in 1462. He had succeeded in acquiring great wealth : in 1440 he 
bestowed five almshouses upon the parish of Hoddesdon, which may be 
seen recorded as the first on the list of benefactions on a board in the porch 
of Broxboume Church.* 

Besides Anne, he had two daughters, viz., Katherine, wife of Wm. Marrow, 
and Margaret, wife of Alderman J. Walden ; also two sons, viz., John, who, 
as already stated, died before his father, and a younger son, Thomas. John 
in his will made several charitable bequests, viz., to hospitals, the '' house 
of lepers " at Kingsland, near Hackney. Also others for religious purposes, 
besides numerous legacies to his different relations, the 5 marks to his 
nephew and two nieces before mentioned. '•To my mother my tablet of 
gold," "To my father my signet of gold," etc. He desired to be buried in 
the churchyard of St. Thomas of Aeon, London. 

♦ Clutterbuck's Herts, II. 72 ; Cussans, Hertford, 204. 



Lady Anne Urswick was an exceedingly handsome woman ; 
our writer in the ^^ City Press," quoting the poet Chaucer, 
compares her to the beautiful prioress in the " Canterbury 
Tales." ^^She hadde a fayre forehead, almost a spanne 
brode, I trow," " and the lofty brow and noble coimtenance 
of Lady Urswyk attract immediate attention from the 
spectator," he adds. 

Lady Anne did not long remain a widow ; in 1482 we find 
her the wife of a Kentish squire, holding lands in Otf ord and 
Kemsing. Perhaps this her second marriage gaye some 
offence to, or disturbed the arrangements of, the executors of 
the late Sir Thomas : howeyer this may be. Lady Anne and 
her husband, John Palmer, found it needful to issue a writ in 
chancery to claim the rights of the said ^^ Dame Anne ;" but 
whether (imder the circumstances) she succeeded in obtaining 
those rights, or whether by her second marriage she had in 
any degree forfeited them, we will not attempt to determine. 
Before they, viz., Anne and her husband, John Pahner, had 
caused this writ to be issued, they had had to reply, in 
defence, to a previous appeal made by a niece of the late Sir 
Thomas, viz.. Dame Katharine Urswick: and whether this 
was the result of any premeditated negligence, or whether of 
careless indi£Perence to a pending duty during the life of Sir 
Thomas, or whether Dame Katharine had failed to keep 
watch over, or taken note of the state of her affairs, we will 
also not attempt to determine, but will place these ** writs in 


chancery " before the reader in an abbreviated form, leaving 
him to form his own judgment. 

They are three in number, viz., the first — ^an appeal of Dame Katherine 
against Dame Anne and her husband, John Palmer, for the restitution of 
her estates ; the second — ^an appeal of Dame Anne and her husband against 
the executors for the proper and fair administration of the estates of the 
late Sir Thomas in behalf of his widow ; and the third— an appeal of Dame 
Anne, again a widaw^ against her step-son, Thomas Palmer, viz., a son of 
her late husband, John Palmer, and the executors of the late John Palmer 
for a fair and proper division of the estate of the late John Palmer, as 
demised in his will to his widow. Dame Anne. 

The first is addressed to the " right reverend Father in God, Thomas, the 
Archbishop of York, Chauncellor of England." '* Meekly beseecheth your 
good and gracious Lordship," etc.* and Dame Katherine goes on to shew 
how her inheritance of Stiresacre* within the parish of Garstangf in the 
county of Lancaster, was delivered of great trust unto one Thomas Urswyk, 
Knight^ now dead, safely to be kept to her (Dame Elatherine's) use. And 
that since the death of Sir Thomas and the union of his widow with John 
Falmer, Dame Katherine had made numerous znd/ruitiess applications for 
restoiation of the deeds, escripts, evidences, and muniments in the hands of 
John Palmer and his wife Anne. That she, Katherine, could not determine 
whether they were enclosed in chest, bag, or box, or whether locked or 
sealed, and therefore had no redress hy course of common law. Therefore she 
pleads of the Lord High Chancellor an adjustment of her wrongs by sum- 
moning the said John and his wife Anne to appear at the King's Court of 
Chancery. And this writ is signed by her two witnesses, Richard Pryce 
and John Huet or Hewet, yeomen of London. John Palmer and Anne his 
wyfe, reply to this " bill of compleynt " of Dame Katherine Urswyke. 

After a little boast, viz., *' That the matter in the said bill contained was 
not suflicient or certain to be answered in law or conscience, and if it were^ it 
is determinable by common law, and not in this court**; the defendants go on 

• Stiresacre, or Steer's Acre. f Garstang, see above. 


to say that divers times since the decease of the said Thomas Urswyk, the 
said Katherine had sent for and desired such evidences as the said Anne 
held in her hands of the estates of the said Katherine : and that in con- 
sequence Dame Anne had taken to one "Thomas FitzWilliam" a box 
containing all such evidences, and that he, Thomas FitzWilliam, iiad 
forwarded the same by Dame Katherine*s own servant, Richard Beylby. 
And they (John and Anne) " request to be dismissed out of this court with 
their reasonable costs," and possibly they were, for Katherine was a country 
dame, the youngest (but now no longer very young) daughter of Robert 
(one of Thomas's executors) her late father, who had been lord of Upraw- 
cliffe ; a small portion of the outskirts of which, viz., in Garstang, had fallen 
to her share, in a tolerably large family, and which might be a needful 
provision for her advancing years. This bill is dated the nth of February 
of 1482. 

And now follow the second Chancery proceedings, in which John Palmer 
and his wife Anne (late the wyfe of Thomas Urswyk, Knt.) accuse one John 
Pynchon, yet living, and others deceased, who had held the manor of 
" Markes,'' messuages, a windmill, and 600 acres of land, meadow, wood, 
and pasture in Dagenham, Barking, Havering, and Romford in the county 
of Essex {in their demesne as of fee) *' to the use and behoof oi the said Thomas 
Urswyk, Knight, late Chief Baron of the King's Exchequer, and of his 
heirs, and to the intent to perform his last will"; John Savage, clerk, and 
others deceased being co-trustees. That he, John Pynchon, being the 
surviving and acting trustee, refused to render an account of the same 
estates for the benefit of Dame Anne and her daughters, as declared by the 
will of the late Sir Thomas. This appeal is addressed to the Bishop of 
Lincoln, then Chancellor of England, and is dated the 29th November, 1482. 

The third writ is addressed to the same potentate by Anne Palmer, mnv 
again a widows complaining that Thomas Palmer (son and heir of her late 
husband John, by his former marriage) and the other trustees of her late 
husband's estates, have failed in the performance of their duty with respect 
to her marriage settlement, which had been confirmed by the last will and 


testament of the deceased John Palmer, viz., that she should have a sure 
and sufficient estate out of her late husband's possessions, being the manor 
of Rye,* in Otford, Kent, six messuages, and about 68 acres of land and 
meadow in Otford and Kemsing, and also lands and tenements bearing a 
rental of £\ per annum in the counties of Sussex, Middlesex, and Essex, 
and others in same counties rented at lo marks per annum. 

The widow Palmer states that she '' hath divers times required the said 
feoffees to make her estate of these aforesaid manors, lands, tenements, 
etc., and that they have refused, and yet refuse against good conscience, to 
cause the same to be done," and that she *' hath no remedy by the common 
law," and so she meekly beseeches his Lordship to grant her a writ of 
"subpoena to be directed to the said Thomas Palmer and the other 
trustees, viz., John Bramston, Squire John Tyrill, George Cheynewe, Piers 
Parker, and Walter at the Wode, commanding them and every of them to 
appear before the King in his Court of Chancery on a certain day, there to 
answer to the premises and to do according to right and good conscience : 
and so she will ever pray," etc. 

• The Rye House Manor was held by the family of Palmer in the reign of 
Richard 3rd, and remained in their possession till that of Henry 8th, when it was 
sold to the king by one of their descendants. Vide J. Hunt, D.D., Day of Rest , 
1878, voU IX. page 362. 


Shakspeare's king RICHARD III.— Act IV., Scene 5. 

Lord Stanley's House, 

Enter Lord Staklet and Sir Christopher Urswick. 

Stanley — Sir Christopher, tell Richmond this from me, 

That in the stye of this most bloody boar, 
My son George Stanley is frank' d up in hold : 
If I revolt, on goes young George's head ; 
The fear of that withholds my present aid, 
But tell me where is princely Richard now ? 

Christopher— At Pembroke or at Har'fordwest in Wales 

Stanley— What men of name resort to him ? 

Christopher— Sir Walter Herbert, a renowned soldier ; 

• " Oxford, redoubted Pembroke, Sir James Blunt, 
And Rice ap Thomas, with a valiant crew ; 
And many others of great name and worth ; 
And towards London do they bend their course. 
If by the way they be not fought withal. 


Well, hie thee to my lord ; commend me to him ; 

Tell him the queen hath heartily consented. 

He shall espouse Elizabeth her daughter. 

These letters will resolve him of my mind. Farewell 

UFFICIENTLY abundant materials are afforded 
wherewith an expert author might weave a very 
copious history of the worthy and industrious man, 
thus named by Shakspeare. 

He would never have been entrusted with so many im- 



portant offices and commissions^ had he not possessed great 
abilitiesi nor have been eulogised as he was, without possessing 
very amiable characteristics. John Weever, an old writer on 
monumental brasses, speaks thus of him : ^^ I haye not heard 
^^ of many clergiemen, neither in luSi nor in these dayes^ that 
^^ would relinquish and refuse thus many ecclesiastical honours 
^^ and preferments, and content himself with a private 
^^ parsonage : but here let him rest as an example for all our 
^^ great prelates to admire, and for few or none to imitate." 

Nevertheless, although a lack of ambition and a sense of 
the emptiness of earthly renown may have had much to do 
with the decision of Christopher in refusing, as he did, the 
bishopric of Norwich (the circumstance to which Weever 
probably mostly refers), yet a longing for rest after the 
arduous life he had passed (and being then in his 52nd year), 
consisting as it had, of a series of ever-varying and most 
responsible duties, often allowing him but scant time to form 
friendships and create sympathies ; closed to him as the doors 
were (by the inexorable superstition of a degenerate priest* 
hood) to the calm joys of a domestic home ; the hopeless 
prospect of ever inducing his own kinsfolk to participate in 
his political views ; all these conflicting yet blending feelings 
must have combined to form a sufGicient pretext for acting as 
he did, and seeking retirement at last in the forest-veiled 
village of Hackney. 

Chbistopher Ueswick, son of John Urswick, of Fumess, 
was bom in the year 1448. Of his early life we can only 


oonjecture. The fact of his father and mother being a lay 
brother and sister of Fumess Abbey (meaning in all 
probability, from what we gather from Thos. West^s work, 
that they held and cultivated lands contiguous to, and for the 
use and suppliance of the inmates of, the monastery, and had 
to conform to the rules of the same), and also his bequest of 
a gold cup to the lord Abbot, are suggestive of his having 
spent his boyhood's days near the home of his ancestors, 
receiving his early education under the Abbot's guidance. 
His respect and attachment to the University of Oxford is 
hardly a sufficient ground for supposing that there he matri- 
culated as a Doctor of Laws and Divinity. The fact of his 
being chosen Master of King's Hall, Cambridge, in 1495, 
identifies him mainly with this University. 

During a portion of his youth we have reeuson to suppose 
that he resided at Baddesworth in Yorkshire, as he states in 
a letter to Lord Darcy that he held a portion of that estate 
by ^* knightly service"; and there is little doubt that, 
observing his thoughtful disposition and early talent for 
diplomacy, the Stanleys were willing and eager to encourage 
him by any means to support the end which they had in 
view, viz., the union of the two conflicting houses of York 
and Lancaster by a matrimonial alliance between Henry, 
Earl of Richmond, and Elizabeth, daughter of Edward the 
4th ; so Margaret, Earl Henry's mother (now lately married 
to Sir Thomas Stanley, 1st Earl of Derby), made Christopher 
her chaplain and confessor, and although he was appointed 


Rector of Puttenham,* in Herts, on the 21st of December, 
1482, being then about 35 years of age, he was compelled to 
relinquish his duties there in 1484, his services being reqxdred 
by his patroness, the Countess of Richmond, who despatched 
him to Flanders, to assist with Cardinal Moreton, Bishop of 
Ely, in watching over the interests, and guarding the person, 
of her son Henry, who was there under the protection (?) of 
the Duke of Bretagne. Hugh Conway was another messenger 
also despatched on the same errand shortly after, with 
money to provide men and all necessaries for the Earl's safe 
conduct to this country when all should be ripe. Earl Henry 
was then at Bretagne, and Christopher, as secretary, carried 
on a secret correspondence by which he subverted the 
treacherous designs of the Duke of Gloucester, who was 
using Peter Landose (treasurer of the Duke of Bretagne, 
under whose protection Henry was supposed to be) as an 
agent to endeavour to get the Earl into his power. Thus 
was he, Christopher, the means not only of eventually raising 
Earl Henry to the throne, but of preserving his Hf e : for who 
opposed Richard, Duke of Grioucester, and lived when in his 
power ? 

Christophert now was chaplain and confessor to the son, 

• Clutterbuck, History of Hertfordshire ^ !• 47^; Urwick's Nonconformity in 
Herts, 455, 456. 

t He did not conduct these affairs by correspondence, but made several 
journeys between England and Flanders. See Fr. Bacon's History of Henry 
Vn,, Works, Montague Ed., V. 41-43, 91 ; Speed's History, 925 ; Knight's 
Erasmus, 76. 


as he had been to the mother, and he made that son 
acquainted with all the agreements that had been made 
between her and the queen-dowager, and with what pleasure 
the latter entertained the prospect of a settlement of old 
enmities by the union of her daughter with the Earl ; also 
how the Duke of Buckingham had been one of the first 
projectors of the scheme. It was really devised by Bishop 
Moreton,* who was in the custody of the Duke by order of 
King Richard, who hated and dreaded that prelate's influence. 
Moreton inflamed Buckingham's mind by describing Richard's 
yillanies, and Reginald Bray,t another faithful servant to 
Henry's mother, the Countess of Richmond, became an active 
agent in her behalf at home, while Moreton and Urswick 
were aiding the Earl abroad. Buckingham having declined 
to grant the Bishop a formal permission to retire to his 
diocese, lest he should awaken the suspicions of King Richard, 
Moreton availed himself of an opportunity connived at by 
him to make his^[escape, and it appears that he reached 
Flanders before the arrival of the countess's messenger, 
Christopher Urswick ;'^and having heard from him all the 

• John Moreton, LL.D., was made Archdeacon of Huntingdon in 1475, and 
Bishop of Ely in 1478. Like his contemporaries, he held very numerous appoint- 
ments, as Archdeaconry of Chichester, Rectory of St. Dunstan's East, etc. 

+ Made Knight of the Garter by Henry the 7th. He was a friend of Urswick' s, 
was present on Bosworth field where he was knighted. He became chancellor of 
the duchy of Lancaster, and high steward of both Universities. In 1497 ^^ '^^^ 
speaker of the House of Commons. He died August 5th, 1503, and was buried in 
St. George's, Windsor. He had a great delight in architecture, was a man of 
singular wisdom and a fervent lover of justice.— Cooper, Athenae Catitab.^ L 6. 


latest particulars of the enterprize, despatched him without a 
day's delay to the Earl at Vannes, who again hurried him ofE 
with a message to Charles, King of France, begging safe 
conduct for himself and followers into that king's dominions. 
The passport obtained, and all being prepared, it was yet 
with great difficulty that Henry succeeded in making his 
escape, with only five attendants, including Urswick, from 
Vannes. The Duke of Bretagne, though his friend, was too 
old and feeble to be aware that his treasurer Landais was an 
artful tool of King Richard, narrowly watching the move- 
ments of the Earl. The latter succeeded in crossing the 
frontier in less than an hour before his pursuers were on the 
spot beyond which Landais and his men could not venture to 
follow. Having reached Angers by lanes and unfrequented 
paths, from thence Henry repaired to the French court at 
Langeais, and obtaining an aid of 2,000 men, with vessels 
sufficient for the expedition, landed safely at Milford Haven, 
and the decisive battle of Bosworth ensued. Richard waa 
now a subject of hatred among many who had formerly 
espoused his cause, he had executed Sir George Brown, Sir 
Roger Clifford, and Sir Thomas St. Leger, who had opposed 
him, and also the unfortunate William Collingbume, for 
writing the distitch about " The cat, the rat, and Lovell the 
dog. Ruled all England under the hog."* He had heard by 
his spies abroad that the countess's agents were carrying on 

• Viz., Catesby, "the cat/' Ratcliffe, "the rat/' and Richard, "the hog," in 
reference to his badge of a " boar.'* 


a close correspondence with many of the chief persons in this 
kingdom, and he supposed the £arl to be efficiently protected 
by the Duke of Bretagne, and these circumstances made him 
tremble. In August, 1485, Henry, Earl of Richmond, with a 
small company, including Christopher, marched from Milford 
Haven to Shrewsbury, where the gates were shut against 
him. So he returned with his company to a village called 
Forton, three miles from Shrewsbury, where he lay that 
night ; and in the morning he was admitted to the town, and 
marching forward came to Bosworth, where the battle was 
fought between him and Richard III., in which Richard was 

Christopher Urswick's newly-blown honours (now that the 
Earl was established on the throne by his victory on Bosworth 
field) came thickly upon him. On the 21st of September, 
1485, one month after the battle, the king having meanwhile 
constituted him his counsellor and almoner, he, ^^ the king's 
well-beloved chaplain, Master Christopher Urswike, the king's 
almoner," receives a grant for life of the prebend within the 
collegiate chapel of St. Stephen, within the palace of West- 
minster, void by decease of Master Thomas Danet, and of 
late surreptitiously and by pretended and unjust title occupied 

♦ Henry VII. never forgot Shrewsbury. In 1488 he stayed there several days ; 
and again in 1498 the king, queen, and prince Arthur were present at St. 
George's feast, which was held in St. Chad's church. The parish of St. Chad is 
the largest in the town, and includes part of Shelton* Hanwood also is in the 
town liberties. Prince Arthur died at Ludlow Castle in 1502, aged x6 years.— 
Phillips' Shrewsbury^ pp* 41, 89, 225. 


by one Master William Beverlay. On the 23rd instant he 
has another " grant for life " of the office of Notary of the 
Chancery, for which, as a Doctor of Laws, he was qualified, 
and for which wages were paid to him out of the hanaper. 
On the following day, the 24th, he is appointed to the office 
of collecting the property forfeited by felons, for the aug- 
mentation of the king's alms, and to hold such office as long 
as he should remain the king's almoner. On the 25th of 
November, 1483, he is made Master of King's Hall, Cam- 
bridge,* on the surrender of that office by Henry Bost, who 
had held it since Edward the 4th'8 time; Urswick was to 
have all such rights and profits out of the issues of the 
counties of Cambridge and Hunts, "with 8 marks for two 
robes," as had been enjoyed in the reign of Edward the 3rd.t 

It is evident that during Urswick's negotiations abroad, his 
Rectory at Puttenham must have been supplied by a curate, 
cpr secular chaplain, as he does not make a formal resignation 
of that living until the 26th November (viz., the day following 
his appointment to the Mastership above named), and is then 
succeeded by Thomas Chantry. 

On the 4th of February, 1486, were drawn out, in anticipa- 
tion of the ambassadorial functions which Master Christopher 

* Cooper, Athenae Cantab.^ I. 24, 526. 

t " An act of resumption passed this year contains exceptive clauses in favour 
of King's Hall and Christopher Urswick, the king's almoner, master or keeper 
of that house. After his coronation the king began with, a progress towards the 
north. He came from Waltham to Cambridge, where he was honourably received 
both of the University and of the to'miy—Cooptr^s Annals 0/ Cambridge, I. 232. 



would soon have to undertake, very laudatory letters of 
commendation, which would constitute the credentials and 
passport of the s^id ^' trusty almoner " to the king of Naples, 
the king of France, the bishops of the Church of St. Peter at 
Rome, and all other foreign kings, princes, potentates, and 
noblemen with whom he might have to confer, craving from 
them safe conduct and ^protection not only for the person of 
the said trusty almoner, but also for his horses and attendants, 
his letters and papers, his baggage and all his properties (so 
minutely detailed that it would almost appear to include his 
shaving tackle), and to send back the trusty almoner whole 
and soimd, with all his belongings, so soon as his mission was 
fulfilled, and thus earn the ^^ eternal gratitude of the king." 
These letters, which are written in Latin, are dated as above, 
from the court of ^^Westminster."* 

On the 20th of the same month Urswick was presented to 
the Prebend of Chiswickjf in the patronage of the Bishop of 
London. And on the 6th of March he is present as one of 
the witnesses to the ceremony of delivering the Chancellor's 
seal to John Moreton, Bishop of Ely, the other witnesses 
being Fox, Bishop of Exeter, and the Duke of Bedford. 
This took place at 10 o'clock in the forenoon in a chamber of 
the ^^ Hospital of St. John's of Jerusalem, without the bars 
of Smithfield." A sequel of the same with regard to the safe 

• Calendar of State Papers ^ Henxy VII., Feb. 4, 1486. 

t Newcourt's Repertorium, I. 139. Newcourt in his note confounds Chris* 
topher with Thomas the Recorder. 


disposition of the said " Grand Seal," was conducted at the 
same hour, im the same place, on the day following, in the 
presence of William Bolton, Richard Skipton, and Robert 

On the 10th of November following (I486), Lord Dynham 
being treasurer, Christopher Urswick receives £10 for his 
costs and expenses on a journey to the castle of Hornby, 
Lancaster, by order of the king, bearing a letter under the 
Privy seal to Jacob Haryngton and others* in the said castle 
by his own hands ; and this commission which was to convey 
a message of conciliation on the part of King Henry, must 
haJZ. one of difflculiy and Al«ity, fof theH«yl«. 
ton. we the Jdng-. moId^Z f o^, regarding Si 
a mean and base usurper, to which unjust conclusion, it is 
needless to say, they were led by the contemplation of past 
cruelties perpetrated by the former supporters of the Lan- 
castrian cause against their forefathers, for which Henry was 
in no degree responsible, and which ought to have been, 
under the existing dynasty, forgiven and forgotten. 

Christopher was going, too, among his own kinsfolk, closely 
allied as they were, by marriage, to these Haryngtons, and 
many of them, no doubt, sharing their political views, 

• They had probably been in a measure concerned in the rebellion of Lord 
Lovell which occurred about this time in the matter of the pretender Simnel. 
Lord Lovell lodged for a time with Sir Thomas Broughton ; the king issued a 
pardon through the Duke of Bedford, at the head of 3,000 men, but Lovell 
doubted the inclination of his own people to keep the peace, and fled to the court 
of the duchess of Burgundy. 


dependent upon them in some measure, as they also appear 
to have been for their agrarian possessions ; and his placid 
and peace-loving disposition, his eloquence and powers of 
persuasion, must have stood the king in good stead on this 
very trying occasion, and gained the hearts of many of his 
misguided Northern subjects, by which he was eventually able 
to crush the rebellion stirred up by the ignorant supporters 
of the pretender Lambert Simnel, and to mercifully put that 
youth (1486) in the comfortable and appropriate position 
of a scullion in his kitchen, from which, being well behaved 
to his superiors, saucy to his equals, and good-looking and 
handsome, as well as clever, he was soon raised to the higher 
post of falconer. All that Urswick may have said, although 
it no doubt mitigated the rising spirit of turbulence in 
Lancaster, did not dissuade some of the Haryngtons, already 
suffering confiscation for their participation in the cause of 
the late King Richard, from joining Sir Thomas Broughton 
in his expedition to support this Simnel and his projectors, 
deluded, as they were, by the duchess of Burgundy, and thus 
brought about the ruin of their houses, and of others who 
were connected with them. 

On the 9th of March in the following year, 1487^ 
Christopher Urswick was presented to the living of All 
Hallows* in the city and diocese of London, vice Alexander 

* Newcourt (I. 249) does not name Urswick, who probably declined the 
appointment in fisivour of John Finneaux, whom Newcourt names as Rector from 
1487 to 1510. 


ELingy deceased, the said living being in the hands of the 
Crown, by reason of the minority of Edward, Earl of 
Warwick ; given at the king's palace at Shene ; and on the 
18th of April to the living of the parish of Chaddisley, near 
ELidderminster, in the diocese of Bath and Wells, given at 
Thetford^ which he resigned on October 11th, the following 
year. In Easter term of 1488 he received, under the Privy 
seal, a further grant of £10, on account of expenses incurred 
by his embassies, or rather, as it is here stated, " by way of 

On the 10th of March, 1488-9, a deputation consisting of 
John Weston, prior of St. John's, Master John Gunthorpe, 
dean of the cathedral church of Wells, Master Christopher 
Urswike, the king's almoner. Master Thomas Savage, and 
Master Henry Aynesworth, Doctor of Laws, the king's coun- 
sellors, were appointed to treat for truce or perpetual peace 
with the most illustrious Ferdinand, king of Castile and 
Leon, and the most serene and noble princess his wife, the 
Lady Isabella, or their ambassadors or deputies* In these 
embassies Urswick evidently stood in the position of secretary 
and treasurer, and he was wont to head the formula of these 
treaties for peace with the words, '' When Christ came into 
the world, peace was sung ; when He went out of the world, 
peace was bequeathed." 

On the 16th of Apriljin that*same year of 1488, by a grant 
given at Chichester, Urswick having resigned the office of 
master or warden of King's Hall College, Cambridge, John 


Blithe was appointed his successor. On the 22nd of May, 
1488, Christopher Urswick, Doctor of Lawt^ was created Dean 
ofYorlt.^ On the 14th of November, on the resignation of 
Richard Langport, Urswick was presented to the Hying of 
Bradwell.juxte.Mare, being in Hie gift and patronage of Sir 
Giles Lord Dawbeney.t On the 11th of December Urswick, 
together with Thomas Warde and Stephen Fryon, had 
authority as commissioners of the king to treat with Charles, 
king of France, for firm and lasting treaty of peace and 
friendship between the said kin^ and their subjects. 

The» aeveral eml««,ie,,-to rerdinand, kig o( Spain, 
the king of the Romans, and Charles, king of France, — in 
which Christopher Urswick was employed, were all linked 
together under one circumstence, namely this. 

The dukedom of Bretagne was falling to the crown of France, and 
Charles, the French king, was undertaking a war to further and support his 
claim, when King Henry of England offered himself as a meditator, and 
sent his chaplain Urswick, with instructions that should the French king 
consent to terms of pacification, he should immediately negotiate with the 
duke of Bretagne. 

The affairs of the latter, who was old and infirm, as already stated, were 
being conducted by the duke of Orleans, and as King Charles knew that 
Orleans would not consent to a treaty, although he received Urswick 
courteously, and professed his desire to be entirely guided by the will of 

* Anthony a Wood, Athenae Oxon,, I. 652. Also, on the loth May in this 
year he was, on the death of Lipear, appointed to the prebend of Lincoln, which 
he resigned in May, 1495, in favour of Peter Pennock. 

t In the will of Sir Giles Dawbeney, or Daubney, Knt., Chamberlain to Henry 
VII., Christopher Urswick is named as one of the executors. See Lansdowne 
MSS., No. 978, folio 893, old number 109. The will is dated 19th May, 1508. 

04 vaoofKDB or the fuolt op tobbwigk. 

Hettfj VII,, be was meielj difflembling, knowing, or at least fonning a 
ielenbij correct judgment on, what the result of Uiswick's mission to 
(Means would be; in which he was conect, for the dnke of Oileans 
replied to King Heni/s message in rather high tenns, sajing that the 
^Doke of Bretagne had tenderij protected King Heniy in his days of 
weakness and misfoftone, and that he now looked to him rather for brave 
troops for his sacconr, than for a vain trea^ of peace." 

Tbos the French king gained the pretext he desired for carrying on the 
war, and Heniy had to use threatening means, finding his persuasions were 
ttnavailing. He sent Urswick and Sir Richard Risley to the Emperor 
Majdmilian, king of the Romans, and also despatched envoys to the kings 
of Spain and Portugal, as if he would form a league against Charles, and the 
latter was not indisposed, after several conflicts, turmoils, and antagonistic 
negotiations lasting three years subsequent to the death of the duke of 
Bretagne, to unite himself by marriage to the young duchess, his daughter 
and heiress, although that lady had, by deputy, already been allied to the 
Emperor Maximilian.* 

On the 7th of May in the year 1489 the king wrote to the 

"Treasurer and Chamberlain of the Exchequer" as follows: 

" For as much as we have appointed and assigned unto the 

ambassadorsf of our cousin the King of the Romans (late 

comen unto us) the sum of seven score and fifteen pounds 

sterling by way of reward. We will therefore and charge 

you that without delay ye deliver the said sum of seven score 

and fifteen pounds in ready money to our full trusty clerc 

• Samuel Knight's £t/e of Erasmus^ pp. 76, ']'] ; Speed's History of Great 
Britain^ sub. Henry VII, ^ 925, 954 ; Lord Bacon's History of Henry VII., 
Works (Montague £d.), V. 41-43. 

t The ambassadors had waited on the king at " Easter term'' just past, and 
the amount of '' their reward" had been determined by a writ under the Privy 
seal, viz., ;f 155,— exceeding £i,SS^ o^ modern valuation. 


and coimsellor Christopher Urswyk, our ahnoner, to the 
intent to divide and distribute the same amongst the said 
ambassadors according as we have giyen him [in] command- 
ment. At our Castle of Hertford." 

In the following year Urswick was Canon of St. G-eorge's, 
Windsor, and also was appointed to the Archdeaconry of 
Wiltshire; also on the 21st of October in the same year a 
grant was issued from the palace at Westminster to Sir Giles 
Lord Dawbeney, Christopher Urswyk, and Master John 
Arundel, clerk, of the next presentation to the Rectory of the 
College of Slapton* in the diocese of Exeter, then in the 
hands of the Crown by the non-age of Henry,t Earl of 

By the engrossing nature of affairs in France, Henry VII. 
was somewhat in danger of neglecting matters which 
demanded his immediate attention in Scotland, the nobles 
being there in rebellion. Accordingly, we find that on the 
18th of March, 1492, Christopher Urswyk, dean of York and 
the king's counsellor, is despatched to that country to receiye 
from King James the ratification of a treaty of peace with 
England, to remain in force until the 29th of November in 
the same year.^ 

On the 30th of October he is again one of the ambassadors 
to the king of France, now to obtain a confirmation from 

* Slapton, Kingsbridge, Dartmouth, Devonshire. 

t Young Henry Percy was a ward of the Crown. 

X Signed at Coldstream in Scotland, county of Berwick. 


Charles of a treaty of peace with the king of England, until 
the death of the last survivor, Maximilian, king of the 
Romans, and his son Philip, Archduke of Austria, to be 
included in the treaty if they desired it. The other ambas- 
sadors were Richard, bishop of Bath and Wells, keeper of 
the Privy Seal ; Sir Giles Dawbeney, knight of the Gkirter, 
and lord-lieutenant of Calais ; Henry Aynesworth, doctor of 
Laws, and James Tyrol, lieutenant of Guisnes. This treaty 
was signed on the 3rd of November, 1492, at Estaples.* 

To Urswick's numerous offices and functions was added 
that of Registrar of the noble order of the Garter^ and in that 
capacity we find him, together with Sir Humphrey Talbot, 
marshal of Calais, and also the York herald, commissioned to 
confer that honour on Alphonso, eldest son of the king of 
Sicily, duke of Calabria, on the 5th of March, 1493. 

On the 21st of the same month he was appointed 
Prebendary of Bottivant in the church of York, and in the 
same year he was made Archdeacon of Richmond in Yorkshire. 
We learn from the historians, Whitaker and LongstafFe, that 
his arms of three lozenges on a bend, with a crescent for 
difference, may be seen on the stained glass, removed to the 
great east window of St. Mary's church, Richmond, and also 
on the outside of the tower. The ^^ crescent for difference" 
appears to have been the indication that he was a younger, 
or second, son. 

On the 23rd of April, 1493, he was again ambassador to 

* Estaples, or Etaples, a seaport, 1 1 miles south of Bouloglie. 


King James of Scotland^ accompanied by the bishop of St. 
Asaph, Lord Graystock, and others, on a mission to prorogue 
the truce which had been made with Henry at Coldstream. 

On the 19th of May Alphonso sends a dispatch to Christopher 
Urswyk, dean of York, and his colleagues, acknowledging 
receipt of the order of the Garter. 

On the 13th of June Urswick, as dean of York, and John 
de Gilys, archdeacon of Gloucester, send a notaried attestation 
to Pope Alexander the sixth, requesting him to excom* 
municate whichever party should first violate the treaty of 
Estaples ; to which the pope replied that " he would wait for 
a similar request from the French king." On the 17th of 
that same month of June safe conduct is demanded for the 
said dean of York, again accompanied by Richard, bishop of 
St. Asaph, and also by John Cartington and Edward RatcUff, 
esquires, to treat with the Scottish commissioners for redress 
of certain injuries. 

In the month of June in the following year Urswick 
resigned the deanery of York, and was succeeded by William 

On the 20th of November, 1495,* he was elected Dean of 
Windsor J and the completion of St. George's Chapel was in a 
great measure carried out under his guidance and that of Sir 
Reginald Bray ; thus their arms frequently occur upon the 

* On the 5th of March in this year also we find that Urswick was by proxy 
admitted to the Archdeaconry of Huntingdon, which he resigned a month after, 
.viz., the 28th April, 1496, in favour of William Warham. 


roof of that building, those of Sir Reginald being ^^ Argent, a 
chevron between three eagles, legs erased, armed gules." 

At Windsor Christopher Urswick has left his mark, for 
he was resident there over ten years. The Deanery was 
rebuilt by him, and high up in the outside wall looking upon 
the little garden, but covered now by a creeper, are the arms 
of Henry VII., with the inscription imdemeath : Chrutophero 
Urswick J Decano^ 1500. A chapel in the north-west comer of 
St. George's Chapel still retains the name of the " Urswick 
Chapel," though it was appropriated in 1818 for the cenotaph 
of the princess Charlotte, erected by nationaJ subscription. 
The stone screen, which divided Urswick chapel from the 
nave, was then removed, imd now stands between two 
adjoining pillars of the choir in the south aisle. The arms of 
Henry VII. are upon the screen, with an inscription, partly 
in Latin, to the following effect : — 

'* Pray for the souls of King Henry VII. and Christofyr Urswick, some- 
time lord Almoner to the King and Dean of this Chapel. Hail Mary 1 and 
blessed be thy holy mother Anne, from whom thy most pure virgin flesh 
issued without stain, Amen. God have mercy on the souls of King Harry 
the Seventh, and Christofyr Urswick, and all Christian souls, Amen. O God, 
who by thy only begotten Son didst redeem mankind, being incarnate of 
the Virgin's womb, and having suffered death, deliver, we beseech thee, the 
souls of Henry VH., and Christofyr, and all those whom Christofyr offended 
during life, from eternal death, and bring them to eternal life ! Amen. 
God have mercy on the souls,*' etc* 

The late Dean Wellesley recognized the honour due to the 
memory of Christopher by giving him a prominent place, 
among the eminent persons connected with St. George's 


Chapel, in the blank window of the Albert Chapel oyer the 
entrance door, executed in enamel mosaics. Urswick is 
represented a life-size figure in his robes of office, in the centre 
of the first tier, side by side with Cardinal Wolsey. 

Erasmus tells a good story which he had from Urswick 
regarding the king about this time. Henry had been for 
some time in a declining state of health, and this had 
encouraged a saucy astrologer to foretell his death, and that 
it should happen before the year expired. The wise king 
had more mind to expose him than to punish him. So he 
sent to the man, and talked friendly with him, seeming not 
to know anything of his insolent prophecy. The king 
gravely asked him whether any future eyents could be 
foretold by the stars ; " Yes, Sir " (says the man) " without 
all doubt." "Well, haye you any skill in the art of fore- 
telling? The man affirmed that he had yery good skill. 
" Come then," says the king, " tell me where you are to be 
in the Christmas holidays that are now coming." The man 
faltered at first, and then plainly confessed he could not tell 
where. "Oh!" says the king, "I am a better astrologer 
than you. I can tell where you will be, — in the tower of 
London," and accordingly commanded him to be committed 
a prisoner thither. And when he had lain there till his spirit 
of diyination was a little cooled, the king ordered him to be 
dismissed for a silly fellow. 

On the 6th of January, 1496, Urswick resigned the Rectory 
of Bradwell-juxta-Mare, to which he had been appointed in 


NoTember, 1488, and which was now in the gift and patronage 
of Sir Reginald Bray, having formerly been as already 
motioned, in that of Sir Giles Daubigny. Edmund Latham, 
A.M., was presented to the living in the place of Urswick, 
who, on the 24th of the next month, viz., February, was 
commissioned to treat with Philip, Archduke of Austria, and 
Duke of Burgundy, for peace and mercantile intercourse 
between him and King Henry. Urswick' s colleagues on this 
occasion were Richard Dunholme, keeper of the Privy Seal ; 
Lord Wells ; John Kendall, prior of St. John's of Jerusalem ; 
William Warham, doctor of Laws, master of the Rolls ; and 
John Risley, knight. 

No reader of English History will require to be reminded 
of the difficult part which our king had here to perform in 
endeavouring to quell or even to mitigate the hostility of the 
house of Austria, nor how that the duchess of Burgundy had 
been ever ready to offer a refuge at her court in Flanders to 
any nobles who rebelled against him, and had even now but 
lately (1497) made a sickly attempt to dethrone him by insti- 
tuting, promoting, and encouraging the Flemish counterfeit 
and pretender, Perkin Warbeck. The treaty of commerce 
above-mentioned was miade at Philip's own request, however. 
His father Maximilian had relinquished in his favour, although 
not yet of age, the government of the Low Countries, and 
this treaty, or rather the renewal of a former one, was 
advantageous to both English and Flemings alike. 

By one of the articles therein set forth, ''Philip engaged to hinder the 


duchess dowager of Burgnndy from giving shelter or protection to the 
rebellious subjects of the king''; and by another article, "that a vessel 
belonging to the subjects of either prince, being shipwrecked on the coast 
of England or on that of the Low Countries, should not be liable to 
confiscation, provided a man, a dog, a cat, or a cock, remained alive on 

The king despatched another embassy to Ferdinand and 
Isabella of Spain towards the close of 1496, and it is possible 
that Urswick was engaged therein; but we have failed to 
find a note of it, or any mention of his name during the 
succeeding year, which was eventful by the rising of the 
Cornish men, in resentment of a heavy subsidy which the 
king was levying in supposed anticipation of war with 
Scotland. The king's ministers Morton and Bray were 
considered to be the cause of their being thus taxed, and were 
accordingly violently denounced. 

On the death of James Goldwell, bishop of Norwich, which 
happened on the 16th of February, 1498, having been con- 
secrated the 4th of October, 1472, that honourable preferment 
was offered to Christopher Urswick, and he refused it. This 
is attributed by some writers to his disregard of high 
honours, and longing for retirement, but there were, no 
doubt, deeper motives for his declining. The diocese of 
Norwich was notorious for its persecutions of Lollards, and 
Christopher was too mild a man for a bi^op in those days. 
The office was refilled at the commencement of the year 1499 
by Thomas Jan, or Janne. And in that same year we have 

• Smollett, History of England y quoting Ryraer, 


an example of the persecutions aboye-named, and which is 
mentioned by Blomefield in his History of Norfolk, viz., that 
in July, 1499, "one Babram, a constant martyr of Jesus 
Christ, was burnt in Norfolk."* 

By a charter,! dated the 26th of November in this same 
year, "An obligation" or debt to the amount of £30, is 
shewn to have been conjointly contracted by Edward 
Stanley, J knight, and one John Nabber, rector of Bury in 
Lancashire, to Master Christopher Urswick, clerk, archdeacon 
of Richmond. The object or nature of this obligation does 
not then appear, but the letter written by the lawyer, Mr. 
Lawrence Starkey, to Thomas Cromwell four years after 
Urswick's death, suggests doubts as to whether the debt was 
ever liquidated, although Mr. Starkey, being in trouble about 
it, asserts that it had been paid eighteen years before 
Urswick's decease, and then it is Bhewn to have been a 
question of lease or rental of the farm of one of his numerous 
benefices. He seems to have lacked friends in the north who 
would protect him from an imf air disposition of his properties 
there, as we may gather from his letter to Lord Darcy, 
written shortly before his death. 

On the 3rd of December, 1500, Urswick resigned the oflSce 
of Archdeacon of Richmond, and was succeeded by James, 

• See Fox, Acts and Monuments (Townsend Ed.), IV. 8. 
t Harleian Catalogue, vol. 3, 56 E. 14. 
X Son of Thomas, Lord Stanley, ist Earl of Derby, whose wife Margaret, 
countess of Richmond, was Urswick's patroness. Edward was after the battle 
of Flodden made Lord Monteagle. 


son of Tlicmias, and brother of Edward Stanley, above men- 
tioned. On the 14th June, 1501, he was re^-appointed to the 
prebend of Lincoln, on the resignation of Isham, and was 
succeeded on the 8th April, 1611, by William Ghrey, arch- 
deacon of Berks. 

Upon the resignation of John Forster, Christopher was on 
the 5th of November, 1502, inducted to the lining of Hacenet, 
and henceforth until his death he enjoyed comparative rest, 
physically, at least ; but his mind and pen were active stillj 
engaged in diplomatic correspondence. That he did not 
neglect his duties as a rector, is evident from the good name 
which he earned, and which has been perpetuated on his 
memorial brass. 

It was prbbably during his brief sojourn in Flanders on 
the most important mission of his life in the year 1483, viz., 
when on behalf of Margaret, countess of Richmond, he was 
aiding to pave the way for her son the Earl Henry to the 
throne of England, that he first made the acquaintance of the 
then humble man of letters, Erasmus, who became so famous 
for the reformatory doctrines which he so fearlessly and 
eloquently propounded in his works. It was said of him 
that ^^he laid the eggs which Luther hatched"; yet he was 
but an infant in Protestantism, though a sage in learning. 
In the year following that in which Urswick was appointed 
to the rectory of " the retired village of Hackney," Erasmus 
writes to him from the castle of Hamme, near Calais, where 
he was then staying on a visit on his way to this country. 


and encloses a translation of Lucian's Dialogue called 
Samniumy sive GalluSj addressed to ^Hhat eminent scholar and 
statesman, Dr. Christopher Ursewicke." 

Omaiissitno viro D. Christ. Urskwico Des. Erasmus Rot. S.D. 
Equidem hac mente semper /ui;omalissi'me idemque humanissime Christophore, 
ut ab nullo prorsum vitio perinde ahhorreurim atque ah ingratitudine nee usquam 
istos hominis vocabulo dtgnos judicaritn, qui alieni in se meriii tempore ullo possent 
oblivisci, Rurstis eos existimaverim heatosy quibus iantum facultatis fortunae 
commodiiaSf suppeditasset, ut bene de se meritis possent parem remetiri gratiam ; 
beatissimos autem quibus licuisset acceptum heneficium aliquo cumfoenore rependere. 

Proinde cum antehac saepenumero mecum repeterem quantum in me nihil 
pf omentum tua benignitas contulisset^ — illud denique mihi in mentem venit ut 
saltern istos quosdam inurbanos homines imitarer^ quiflosculo quodam insigni aut 
alio simili symbolo misso voluntatis propensionem^ promptique animi studium 
testificari solent : praesertim si tenues erga eos quibus neque res neque animus ^if 
alienorum egens munerum. Ergo Graecanica ingredienti fiovaeta {nam musarum^ 
horti vel mediis vernant brumis) statim inter multos varia ablandientes gratia 
hie LuciANi flosculus praeter caeteros arrisit. Bum non ungue sed calamo 
decerptum ad te mitto^ non solum novitate gratum, colore varium, specie venustum. 
Nee odore mode fragrantem^ verum etiam succo praesentaneo salubrem^ ei 
efficacem^ etc. Quem uti legas atlentius te majorem in modum rogo, si quando ttbi 
per tua licebat negotia frontem export igere. — Audies enim Gallum cum hero 
sutore confabulantem magis redicule quam ullus possit ye\oiro7roto9, sed rursum 
sapientius quam Theologorum ac Philosopharum vulgus nonnunquam in scholi^ 
magno supercilio magnis de nugis disputat. Vale optime atque humanissime 
Christophore, et Erasmum inter tuos ascribito clientulos amore^ studio^ officio 
cessurum nemini. Ex Arce Hammensi anno 1503.* 

Erasmus speaks of his great obligations to Urswick, and '* how willing he 
was to be grateful if it were more in his power to be ; his only comfort 
being that meaner persons than himself had been permitted to present a 
flower or any such trifle to persons of the highest condition/to whom it was 

• Given by Dr. Samuel Knight in his Life 0/ Erasmus, pp. 73-75. 


more acceptable than a present of greater value. That therefore lately 

entering into the gardens of Greece, he had picked a flower of Lucjan, v^ijp^ 

beautiful, as he thought, and had now sent it as a little token to him, n^t 

only as a grateful novelty, but of a colour, smell, and taste agreeable to a 

man of such distinguishing sense. Erasmus commends the author of it for 

being a derider of the vulgar philosophy and vulgar religion, from whence 

I he had had the name of Atheist cast upon him by wicked and superstitious 

i men. Erasmus desires Urswick to read over this dialogue with some 

I attention, if his public business would give him time ; for he would here 

find things, though seemingly ludicrous, told in such a pleasant way, as 

nothing could more eflfectually divert him, and yet with so much morality 

and wisdom intermixed as it exceeded the common disputations of the 

I ^hools, where there was only a dull wrangling for nothing. The dedicatory 

letter ends thus : — ** Farewell, my best and kindest Christopher, and writp 
down Erasmus among the number of your inferior clients, inferior to none 
of them in affection, respect, and duty. From the castle of Hamme, 1503." 

It is evident from this letter that Erasmus had already 
received great kindness and important help from Christopher 
Urswick, and that true respect and gratitude prompted the 
expressions of esteem and love. In the Latin those are 
natural, but when translated there seems a shade of flattery 
not entirely pleasing, and not completely realized in the 
jaunty way in which Erasmus afterwards speaks of Urswick 
in a letter to his friend Ammonius some few years later ; 
but he may be excused of any small amount of insincerity, 
on the groimds that he was now about to sojourn in England 
in order to earn a reputation as a man of letters, and being 
poor, needed kind and influential friends. Erasmus eventu- 
ally received many presents from his friends, viz., Fisher 
(bishop of Rochester), Fox, More, Dean Colet, Ammonius, 


&C.9 Urswick being named in the list ; yet the attachment of 
the latter to him was not an exceedingly warm one ; indeed, 
Erasmus himself, in one of his letters, introduces the 
expression " If Ursewick is still friendly/' m if he had some 
reason to be apprehensive on the point. The Rector of 
Hackney, as a sober-minded and deep-thinkinir man, was 
able to^, recognize, and deplore m Jy existing evils and 
corruptions in the Church then established, yet he regarded 
with veneration many of its superstitions, such as prayers 
for the dead, pilgrimages, an undue reverence for the Virgin 
Mary, traditions not sanctioned by Holy Writ. Over many 
of these Erasmus was inclined to ride rough-shod. Luke 
Hall, writing of him, says, '' with Erasmus the monks are an 
everlasting subject for ridicule," and then proceeds to quote 
his opinions upon that community : — 

"They think" (says Erasmus) " that they give a veiy plain proof of their 
piety by having nothing to do with learning, so that they can scarcely ever 
read. Next, while in their churches, they bray out, like asses, the psalms 
which they count* indeed, but do not understand ; they think that God 
listens well pleased to their melody. Some there are who make much of 
their filth and begging, bellowing for bread in front of our doors, and 
crowding in upon us eveiywhere in public-houses, in waggons, and passage 
boats, not without great loss to other beggars" (evidently one of Erasmus' 
jokes). " These veiy delightful men, who are remarkable only for their dirt, 
their ignorance, their clownish manners, and their impudence, pretend that 
they are the genuine successors of the Apostles." 

In the dialogue dedicated by Erasmus to Christopher, the 

* Count, cant, or sing,— hence canting, as a term of reproach, and '* numbers '' 
as applied to music or poetry. 


cobbler Michullus, dreaming that he had become an heir to a 
millionaire, is suddenly awakened by the crowing of his cock, 
whom he threatens to kill as soon as he gets up. The cock 
discovers himself to be Pythagoras, and endeavours to 
persuade the cobbler that he is much happier than the rich 
men whom he envies. To convince him, he desires him to 
pluck one of the long feathers from his tail which has the 
power of conferring invisibility. The cobbler having plucked 
both the cock's feathers, — ^much to the cock's chagrin, which 
is very amusingly described, — they go together to the houses 
of several rich men, and behold their miseries and their vices. 
Whether the translation of the dialogue had anything to do 
in the matter, we cannot say ; but it is a curious coincidence 
that, soon after the receipt of it, Urswick did retire from 
public life, resigned his public appointments, and took up his 
abode at Hackney, ^^ near the city, but out of the bustle and 
noise of it."* 

The first ten years of Urswick's life at Hackney seem to 
have been quiet and uneventful, with the exception that he 
was made Archdeacon of Oxford in 1504. In the year 1510 
we find him, as already shewn, one of the principal witnesses 
to the charter which founded the order of especial services to 
be conducted at the church of Badsworth in memory of the 
Urswick family ^* for ever," at the bequest of his late kins- 
woman, Isabel Vavasour, daughter of Robert Urswick, of 

•It should be noted that Elizabeth, Henry Vllth's wife died Feb. ii, 1503; 
Henry VIU died April 22, 1509. 


Badsworth ; — Christopher's old master, Henry VII., had been 
laid in his grave, and a more warlike monarch reigned in his 
stead. Soon there came the memorable battle of Flodden 
field, fought in the year 1613, when Sir William Molineux, of 
Sephton, Sir Edward Norris, of Speke, and Sir Richard 
Assheton, of Middleton, greatly distinguished themselves 
under the command of Sir Edward Stanley ; and although, in 
the wholesale carnage which then ensued, the fate of lesser 
knights has been disregarded in history, it is probable that 
some of the Urswick family mingled in the fray, more 
especially as we learn from Gregson, in his FragmenU of 
Lancashire^ that their arms are depicted, as well as those of 
the Harringtons, in the windows of the great baronial hall of 
Speke, Ghildwall, near Liverpool. Also the aUiance of the 
Urswicks with the names of Molineux, Assheton, and South- 
worth (for Sir Thomas Southworth was one of the heroes of 
that fight) and their quarterings with the Asshetons and other 
distinguished families will equally suggest the improbability 
of their having been absent when the king 

** For the Earl of Surrey sent, 
*' And Regent of the North him made, 
"And bade him if the Scots were bent, 
"The northern borders to invade, 
"That he should raise a royal band 
" In Bishoprick and in Yorkshire, 
" In Westmoreland and Cumberland, 
" In Cheshire and in Lancashire/' 

There were slain at this battle^ on the side of the Scots, J 2 
earlS| 13 lords, and five eldest sons of peers. 


Our worthy rector of Hackney, whose life and labours had 
been deyoted to such very different ends, must have been 
saddened at these tales of bloodshed. On the 15th of June 
in that eventful year, 1513, he had, together with one Robert 
Gressy, received a grant of the next presentation to a 
prebend and canonry in the collegiate chapel of St. Stephen's, 
Westminster; issued at the king's palace at Greenwich on 
the day above-named, and delivered at the court of West- 
minster on the 9th of July following. And 

On the 4th of September, viz., only five days before the 
gi*eat battle in the north, he was one of those legally 
appointed to carry out the provisions of the will of his late 
patroness, the countess of Richmond, with regard to her 
estates in Lancashire, Northamptonshire, Leicestershire^ 
Hertfordshire, Bedfordshire, Cambridge, Essex, Lincoln, 
Somerset, and Cardigan, with the issues of which, if we 
rightly understand the document, she had endowed the 
deanery and canonry of St. George's, Windsor. Engaged in 
the same service were Sir John Ferreux, chief justice of the 
king's bench; Robert Rede, chief justice of the common 
pleas; Robert Brudnell, justice of the king's bench; Sir 
Thomas Lovell, Sir Thomas Englefield, Sir Robert Southwell, 
Sic John Outt, and John Heron. 

It will readily be supposed that a man of Urswick's character would be 
coxuidered by his friends a desirable executor. We have an instance of this 
in the case of the now deceased Sir Robert Southwell above*<neaitioned^ 
who was chief butler of England, also surveyor and approver of castles, 
lordships, etc., in England, Wales, and Calais ; he left a widow, Elizabeth 


Southwell, his executrix, and Christopher Urswick, archdeacon of Oxford, 
Robert Southwell, his son, and William Wutton, co-executors. But the 
king appears for some cause to have overruled the testament of the late Sir 
Robert, and changed the disposition of his property, for he gives on the 
29th of May, 15 14, a royal pardon and release to the said widow and her 
co-executors. Probably that which follows on the 2xst of June, refers to 
the same subject, when Christopher Urswick, clerk, and six knights and 
squires are pardoned for the alienation of manors and estates in Bucks, 
Norfolk, Suffolk, and other counties, and the issues of these estates are 
granted to Charles, Earl of Worcester. Sir Robert Southwell held many 
offices besides those above-mentioned, as auditor and receiver of the 
honours of *' Clare and Gloucester,'^ in Norfolk, Suflfolk, Cambs, Hunting- 
don, Essex, and Hertford, and of lands belonging to th« estates of Lord 
FitzWalter in same county, also receiver for the lands in the same 
counties, which belonged to the duchy of York ; farmer of lands called 
Disse and Hempnale in Norfolk, etc. We will form no rash or disloyal 
conjectures as to what these alienations or diversions of property migh 
imply, the position of affairs being too obscurely represented, and motives 
unexplained, to form any judgment as to whether it was an instance of regal 
rapacity or a fair and just claim on the part of the Crown. 

In the following year, viz., dated the 12th July, 1515, we find a charter by 
which Thomas Cheyne, armiger, and John Martyn, kinsman and heir of 
Robert Martyn, armiger, concede to Christopher Urswyk, clerk (or cleric), 
Robert Poynes, knight, Henry Wyatt, knight, Cuthbert Tunstall, clerk, John 
More, serjeant-at-law, Thomas More, gentleman, John Spylman, Richard 
Belamy, and Alan Horde, the manor of Leghe in the parish of Iden, neai 
Rye, county of Sussex, to the use of Frideswide, wife of the said Thomas 
Cheyne, for the term of her life. Christopher Halys, William at Wode, and 
John Davy being attorneys appointed to release the said lands. Another 
example of the same charter, dated 5th October following, shews John 
Davy to be the only remaining constituted attorney * 

* Harleian Catalogue, 76 F. 16 and 17, vol. 5. 


One of the presents which Erasmus received from Urswick, 
and probably by far the most valuable, as well as the most 
acceptable, for he was a great traveller, was that of a horse, 
of whose qualities he spoke very highly ; but while deep in 
his books at Flanders, he neglected to give this animal 
proper exercise ; from the combined e£Eects of which and too 
much food and water in his stable, tbe poor beast died. 
Erasmus forthwith wrot^ to his friend the Rector, desiring a 
renewal of his favours; and although he in the meantime 
obtains a handsome white horse from his friend Ammonius, 
he does not cease to importune Urswick on the subject. 

On this and other topics we gather from "State papers" 
a series of letters between Erasmus and his friends, viz., 
Ammonius, who was secretary for the Latin and Italian 
tongues to King Henry the 8th, and Sir Thomas More ; also 
between Thomas Allen, a priest, and Greorge Talbot, 4th 
earl of Shrewsbury, to whom Allen was probably chaplain 
or private secretary: and in all of these Urswick's name 
occurs. First we have on the 26th of February, 1516, a letter 
from Sir Thomas More to Erasmus, in the postscript of which 
More says that he has seen Urswick, who ^^ acknowledges that 
he has not forgotten the horse." On the 22nd of April 
Erasmus writes from Rochester, where he is staying on a visit 
to Bishop Fisher,* to his friend Ammonius, and says that 

* Fisher, bishop of Rochester, and Sir Thomas More, then lord Chancellor, 
were both beheaded in 1535, for refusing to acknowledge the king as supreme 
head of the Church. 


^^ Fisher had persuaded him to spend ten days with him, and 
he had regretted it more than ten times ; that he had hoped 
to wheedle Urswick out of a new horse, by sending him a 
New Testament,* but that Urswick was away, and so his 
* hunting ' had come to nought." " His old horse," he says, 
^^had died of drink in Flanders. Will not leave before the 
end of the week. Had written to More on leaving home, and 
given him a copy of his work, Epistola ad Leanem^ rather 
badly written." Asks some service of Ammonius, the nature 
of which is not explained. 

On receipt of this letter, Ammonius immediately sends his 
friend, as already mentioned, a beautiful white horse, which 
Erasmus acknowledges in his usual jocose style ; for in tiiis 
matter he somewhat resembled Sir Thomas More. ^^The 
seryant John," who brought the horse, ^^ would have gained 
a beating, had not More stepped in to save him. For so soon 
as More heard that he was staying at Rochester, he had 
hastened to pay him a visit, as if he never expected to> see 
him again." Says that Ammonius is always ^'catching at 
occasions for making presents, and that he would have sent 
this one back if More had not dissuaded him." ^^ Is very 
much pleased with the handsome white horse, but would 
rather have played the thief with the archbishop of York, or 
Colet,t or Ursewick ; from the latter he had," he says, " been 

* The £amou8 edition of the Greek Testament with Latin translation and notes 
by Rrasmus, completed in 15 16. 

t Dean Colet, founder of St. Paul's School, dean of St. Paul's. 


promised a horse, and Ursewick would certainly keep his 
word." Finishes his letter with a Latin quotationi Idque ad 
Calendas nan Oraecas Med Oetobre%y and being shortly bound for 
Brabant, promises to write from tiiere to York and Lancaster* 
The next is from Thomas Allen, dated the 10th of Hay, 
from his home at Coldharbour (near Dorking), to the earl of 
Shrewsbury. — 

'' Had sent his lordship by Richard Woodbouse, the carrier, ten pasties 
of congers^ the greatest and fattest he bad ever seen." The pasties had 
been baked at faU bouse bj the earl's own servant, who was there on an 
errand from his master, and would have himself taken the pasties, but Allen 
preferred to entertain the man longer, and send them by carrier. 

Says that he *' spoke yesterday with Mr. Ursewick, who told him the 
following news, that Mr. Ponynges and Dr. Tnnstall would come home in 
the course of the next week, and that then his lordship should know more ; 
that on that day the earl of Northumberland was to be delivered out of the 
Fleet ; that yesterday the ambassadors of Scotland had dined with my lord 
Cardinal, and in their company were the bishop of Ely, the prior of St. 
John's of Jerusalem, and the abbot of Westminster." 

Mr. Allen then begs his lordship's leave to perform a pilgrimage to 
Canterbury, which he feels he owes for recovery from sickness, and more 
during the summer which he hopes with the earl's licence to undertake. 

"This day" (says Mr. Allen, May 24th, 15 16) "I trust to send towards 
Wingfield two tuns of wine ; whereof four hogsheads are claret, viz., two of 
red, and one of white wine ; the other puncheon fresh wine. If it be well 
carried, I trust your lordship will like it well. It will cost £s 6s. 8d. the 
tun ; whereof the wains must have for their labour 20 shillings." 

*'Mr. Urswick had spoken with my lord of Northumberland,* who 

* Henry Algernon Percy, 5th earl of Northumberland. Some of the Urswick 

family bore the Percy badge or crest, showing they were partizans of that house. 

See Harleian MSB. 2076, folio 796, viz., "a lion statant on a cap of maintenance/' 

surmounting the Urswick shield of ''three lozenges on a bend.'' 



remains in the same mind, and prays the earl of Shrewsbury to appoint a 
day for the pilgrimage." 

" A question had been put by Sir William Compton and others to the earl 
of Northumberland respecting the marriage of his son, to which the earl 
had replied, ' I have concluded with my lord of Shrewsbury.' Also the earl 
had been desired to bring his son to the court, and had answered, ' When 
he is better learned, and well acquainted with his wift^ shortly after he shall 
come to court.' This communication piques him more heartily forward 
than ever." These short but pithy sentences require explanation. They 
refer to the betrothal of Lady Mary, daughter of George Talbot, earl of 
Sjbrewsbury, to the young Henry Percy here mentioned, and when Northum- 
berland speaks of his son's better acquaintance with his wife^ he implies the 
future wife whom he and Talbot had determined upon for him. But young 
Henry was somewhat contumacious on this point, and the marriage did not 
take place until some years after, when it was hastily consummated on 
account of his unfortunate attachment to Anne Boleyn. Young Percy was 
in the household of Cardinal Wolsey, and that prelate had to use all his 
influence and powers of persuasion to induce him not to incur the displea- 
sure of the king, as well as that of his own father, by pursuing an object so 
hopelessly unattainable. He was rewarded by his father the earl for his 
ultimate obedience in this matter by a tenure of the castle of Alnwick, but 
it gave him no pleasure, and his union with Lady Mary proved a most 
unhappy one. He lived only ten or twelve years after its consummation, 
dying at Hackney in the prime of life, having been employed in the arrest 
of Cardinal Wolsey at Cawood Castle, and having had to sit as one of the 
judges at the trial of Mistress Anne ; so that " his whole life was a pitiable 

We now come to another letter from Allen to the earl, 
dated the 28th of the same month as the foregoing, in which 
in one place he says, '^ Mr. Urswick sends by the bearer, 

• Monuments of Hackney Churchy by W. Simpson. 


Thomas Agard, ten pasties of baken conger/' and further on, 
"Urswick says the prince of Castile comes not here this 
year." And three days later ^ he again writes saying that he 
^' was with Master Comptroller Ponyngs and Master Urswick 
yesternight," (and learned) " that a bill had been made by the 
council, waiting the king's signature, commanding the earl's 
attendance at court "; ^^ has heard nothing of it yet from the 
Cardinal, a great friend of your lordship's." 

^^ Encloses copy of a letter sent to the Cardinal out of 
Italy, which Mr. Urswick desires, after the sight thereof, 
your lordship will break or burn." 

^^ Urswick wonders the earl does not appoint a day for the 
pilgrimage to Doncaster. As knoweth our Lord, who ever 
hath your lordship in his blessed governance." 

Allen* writes again on the 8th of June, enclosing a letter 
from Urswick, and adding his advice to that of the Cardinal, 
with whom he had had an interview, that the earl, if well 
enough, should come to court as '^ it is the king's pleasure to 
have my lord here, and nigh about him. If he does not 
intend to <5ome, thinks he had better write an excuse to the 
king, as well as to the Cardinal and other friends ; fears, 
however, that the Cardinal will not make the best excuse for 
him, being very desirous of his company." 

On the 5th of July in that same year, 1616, Ueswick, with 

* Cardinal Allen was in the year 151 1 sent on an embassy to Rome by the 
Archbishop of Canterbury, but was not very successful in his management, and 
was recalled. See Knight's Life of Erasmus ^ p. 128. 


the Duke of Norf oik, the Earl of Surrey, Sir Thomas LoreH^ 
a&d two and twenty others, were appointed commissioners of 
sewers in the comities of Middlesex, Essex, and Herts, for 
the district extending from the town of Ware, up the rirer 
Thames, and along the banks thereof. 

In August, Erasmus being then on a visit to Sir Thomu 
More at his house at Chelsea, again writes to his friend 
Ammonius. It was the hunting season apparently, for he 
says, '^he hopes the hunting may prove as fortunate to 
Ammonius as it has proved unfortunate to himself. It 
carried away the king, then the Cardinal. He had angled 
for Urswick by sending him a New Testament, and asked for 
the horse he had promised ; but finds, on calling to see him 
on Monday, that he also had gone hunting, and would not be 
back for a week. Thynne slips off in the same way, and 
now Ammonius. Begs him to open the letter intended for 
ihe pope, and have it recopied. Hopes for success in their 
project. Might possibly stay in England a few days waiting 
for the horse from Urswick, were he not tired of this country, 
and felt that he was a stale guest to More's wife." ^^Sentirem 
me vetulum jam hospitem uxori Moricae suppetere.^^^ 

On leaving England, Erasmus wrote to his late host. Sir 
Thomas; and on the 31st of October he received More's 
reply, to the effect that he was late in answering, as he had 
been desirious of learning something from Urswick about the 

* This letter is dated 151 1 in the collected Epistles to or from Erasmus (part I., 
117, 126), its real date was probably in the year 15 13. 


horse, but had been unsuccessful, Urswick being away at a 
court of his. Erasmus would find the money all right.* 

'' The letters ^hich they had both written to Latimer begging him to stay 
a month or so with the bishop of Rochester, had arrived too late, for 
Latimer had already resolved to go to Oxford, and could not be persuaded 
to defer his visit. Was much pleased with the version of the New Testa- 
ment, but thinks Erasmus has been needlessly scrupulous, and should not 
have retained such words as Sabbatum or any unclassical expression. 
Regrets to say that there are some here who have determined to read the 
writings of Erasmus with a very different intention (to his own), and conjures 
him not to be hasty to publish, and carefully to avoid all occasion of giving 
offence." *' Are you not," More says, ** horribly afeard ? Chief of the 
conspirators is a Franciscan, of whom you made such honourable mentionf 
in your edition of * St. Jerome.' He and others of his order agreed together 
over their cups to divide the works among them, and read them carefully, 
but not to understand them ; for in the morning they had forgotten their 
purpose, and fell to begging, which they understood much better. The 
Eptstola obscurorum vivorum is popular everywhere. Is glad that Peter likes 
his Nusquama^X and wishes to hear whether Tunstall and other judges 
approve of it. Has succeeded in obtaining more favourable terms from 
Maruffo, publisher." Dated London, 31st October, 15 16. 

More writes again to Erasmus in the month of January 
following, 1516-7, saying that "he has received his letter, 
written at Calais, informing him of his prosperous voyage, 

* Money received by More on behalf of Erasmus for the publication of some 
works of the latter. Or money received for him from Urswick. Erasmus 
Epistolae^ part L, 126. The date given is 15 13. 

t Ironically spoken. It was the friar who preached against Jerome, and was 
the means of bringing that good and holy man to the stake. 

X Utopia y by Sir Thomas More. He calls Erasmus " Peter/' jokingly. It was 
one Peter who drove Erasmus into a convent against his will in his early days. 
His gran^ther's name was also Peter. 


and that he hears from the provost of Cassell that ere he left 
home Erasmus had got safe to Brussels. Maruffo grumbles 
that he has been a loser by the money paid to Erasmus. 
Has sent a bill for £20 more from the Archbishop. The 
bearer will pay to Agidius the £20, left in his (More's) hands 
by Erasmus. Urswick will take care he shall soon have a 
horse. Had sent his Utopia (to the publisher) some time 
since^ and was delighted to hear it will come out in a 
magnificent form."* 

It appears that Erasmus had before this received another 
horse from Christopher, for on the 5th of Jime he writes to 
Urswick, saying that ^^his genius of a horse has carried him 
safely backwards and forwards to Basle, a long and perilous 
journey ; that he has visited so many Universities that now 
he is as wise as Homer's Ulysses, 

Mares ?iominufn multorum vidit et urbes. 

That while he has grown as lean as a rake by hard study 
during several months' stay at Basle, his horse has had 
nothing to do, and has grown so fat that he can scarcely 
enter his stable. Doubts not that Urswick has seen the New 
Testament (Erasmus must mean perused^ for he must have 
received the presentation copy). 8t Jerome will soon appear, 
together with his work, Deprincipia instituane,^^ etc. 

The symptoms of obesity in the animal seem to have 
proved fatal, for we find Urswick's kindness is again appealed 
to. In August More writes from London to Erasmus, and 

* Brewer, State Papers, Henry VIII. , 11. part 2, p. 913 (2842). 


tells him that ^^he has spoken to Urswick about the horse, 
but he has none fit to send at present." On the 5th of 
March, 1517-8, Erasmus writes to More, and says, ^' If Urswick 
is still friendly ^ More may urge him to send Erasmus a horse, 
as he must go to Basle or Venice to edit his New Testament, 
and then proposes to take leave of authorship." In another 
letter written in the same month, from Louvaine, he remarks, 
^^ Urswick a year ago promised me a horse, and on that 
expectation I gave him a New Testament."* Whether 
Urswick was able to execute this third commission for his 
friend, is very doubtful, as he was now in the seventy-first 
year of his age, and his health apparently failing. 

On June 5th, 1517, Erasmus writes from St. Omer to 
Urswick thus : — 

Quattior Hiercnymi volumtna mist Architpiscopo Cantauriensi per hunc 
Pbtrum unoculum^ tuum alumnum, quern offendi sic tncumbentem scribendis 
itbrisp ut se laboribus ptvpemodum confecerit, Opinor homini fatum instare, qui 
iam sui dissimilis sit f actus, Quin et adstemius propemodum est redditus, et vini 
osor, atqui hinc pallor insolitus, Tuorum in me beneficiorum semper meminero^ 
quicunque me terrarum angulus est habiturus. Bene Vale, Apud divum Audo- 
marum, I Juniiy 15 17. See "ExzaxnxMi Epistolcuy part i, 25 50. 

** I have sent to the Archbishop of Canterburj'f four volumes of Jerome 

* In the year 15 19 died Thomas Urswick, of Ulverston, and his uncle Chris- 
topher became his next male heir. 

t *' Archbishop Warham was one of Erasmus his best and most extraordinary 
friends and benefactors. Soon after Cranmer's appointment More wrote to 
Erasmus that he who filled the see of Canterbury bore no less love to him than 
Warham had done before, and there was no man living that loved him better. 
And Erasmus mentioning his great loss in Archbishop Warham and divers other 
patrons of his that were taken off by death, comforted himself that God had 
made up those losses to him by raising him up other friends." Strype's Cranmer, 
8vo. ed., p. 576. Peter, Urswick' s alumnus, was possibly Erasmus himself. 


by the one-eyed Peter your prol^g6, whom I have found so devoting 
himself to writing books, that he has well nigh killed himself with study. 
I think some fate is threatening the man, he has become so altered, almost 
a total abstainer from food, a hater of wine, and hence uncommonly pale. 


Omer, June sth, 1517." 

On the 17th of July Thomas Allen forwards three letters 
of news from Urswick to the earl of Shrewsbury, but being 
on matters of a diplomatic nature, their contents are not made 
known. It is very evident that Urswick entertained a deep 
regard for George Talbot, and furnished him with fore- 
warnings which may have induced forearmings. A long 
letter of domestic news and court gossip from Allen to the 
earl, accompanies the enclosure of Urswick's letters, but they 
are not of sufficient interest to be added here. 

The following letter written by Christopher Urswick, 
rector, to Thomas Goldstone, prior of Christ Church (viz., the 
cathedral) of Canterbury, bears no date ; but it is clear from 
the tenour of it that the appropriation of Church property 
was its main subject ; and as the accession of King Henry 
the Sth was in 1509, — Thomas Goldstone being prior of 
Canterbury from 1494 to 1517, — we may conclude that it 
was towards the expiration of his appointment, circ. 1516, 
that he received this epistle. 

"Christopher Urswick, Rector, to the reverend father in Christ Sir 

Thomas Goldstone, prior of Christ Church, Canterbury, sendeth greeting.* 

** Herewith, most religious Sir, you have the letter of Celsus Veronensis 

♦ B.M., Additional MSS., 15, 673, folio 113. 


to the Venetians, dissuading them by many arguments and examples against 
the usurpation of ecclesiastical property, I am not at all surprised that you 
have strongly desired to obtain a copy of it. For while it states with the 
greatest clearness and copiousness whatever can be said on the subject by 
the most learned, or reasoned by the most acute, you fill the second post of 
honour in that very church wherein ,the pontiff the divine Thomas preferred 
to lay down his life, rather than survive ecclesiastical liberty. From this 
letter as from a fountain you may draw abundant material for argument, as 
often as you meet with the opponents of ecclesiastical liberty, who indeed 
(it is to be lamented) are very many everywhere. 

" Moreover, by a certain alternation or vicissitude (as I think) of the times, 
it has come to pass that whereas formerly the Christian name was diffused 
far and wide throughout the world, it is now confined within narrow limits, 
and covers only the smallest tracts. So that even in those provinces which 
still retain the Christian name, all is degenerating, and reverence for sacer- 
dotal dignity is far less than it was with our ancestors ; a fact which you may 
easily detect if you compare the men of our age with their predecessors. 
To wit, they so venerated the priesthood that many of them while living 
dedicated a large portion of their patrimony to priests and priestly offices ; 
and when dying wished to leave no other heirs than churches. How many 
temples everywhere in the world were built by men of past generations in 
honour of God ; how many sacred edifices may you see in every country 
endowed by them with most abundant possessions, the clearest sign, surely, 
of august and ancient piety. But in our age we have sunk so low that not 
only do churches no longer expect an3rthing to be given to them, but they 
consider it is very well indeed if nothing be taken away from them ; instead 
of the old liberality, we have, on the part of most, detestable rapacity, nay 
rather sacrilege. And yet they who dare such things contend that they are 
acting rightly ; and straightway speak recklessly of the corrupt morals of the 
clergy and their open vices, as if the censorship of others belonged to 
them. Thus they demand of us the ancient integrity of life, the ancient 
sanctity of manners ; but consider whether we may not far more fairly 


demand from them a just judgment concerning us. Consider, I ask you, if 
any one, — who, on account of the wickedness of this or that citizen, were 
to condemn as infamous the whole State, governed by the most equitable 
institutions, — would he be thought a fair judge ? Yet this is just what these 
persons now are doing. Discovering the crimes of a few, they forthwith 
denounce the entire flock of clergy to be flagitious ; thus shewing their 
ignorance of human life and society, wherein no multitude or class is 
without a criminal. How much fairer were their predecessors ! for if any 
one contend that there were no vicious clergy in that age, he may easily be 
convinced by the decrees of the Holy Fathers most severely coercing the 
vices of the clergy. But our ancestors did not think that all the clergy were 
therefore to be held in hatred, nor that the residue of good clergy were to 
be had in less esteem, or to be supported with less liberality. Now, indeed, 
if you inveigh vehemently against the vices of men the one cry of all. the 
one reply is. that the clergy do the same ! With this as their defence, men 
think themselves secure ; as if forsooth the worst things were not to be 
condemned, but rather to be imitated. Satisfied with this mention of the 
crimes of others, they neither amend themselves, nor desist from speaking 
and thinking evil of all clerics on account of the sins of some. 

** This we might bear with equanimity, provided they dared nothing more 
criminal. But whatever is dedicated to God they esteem secular, and 
attempt to seize and to keep it as a tiling taken from enemies in just war. 
Do men of this stamp, I ask, escape the guilt of sacrilege ? Take and keep 
therefore, my dear Thomas, as a shield against them, this letter of the most 
religious Celsus, long asked for by you from me, and now at length tran 
scribed, in which surely it is difficult to say, whether the style excels the 
matter, or the matter the style. And as it has been highly commended by 
two most learned men of our age, Hermolaus Barbarus and Domitius 
Veronensis, I have thought that their letters, in which they speak of it with 
extraordinary praise, should be annexed, that you may the better test your 
own judgment, and may be stirred more eagerly to its perusal. Farewell." 

Thomas Goldstone was a man of great learning, and much 


in favour with Henry VII., who sent him as ambassador to 
the French king ; but his memory is still more lasting for the 
new buildings and other reparations which he made in and 
about Canterbury Cathedral, of which he was prior from 
1494 to 1517.* 

The manuscript in the British Museum seems to be the 
very copy which Urswick sent. It contains, immediately 
before this letter of Urswick's, the letter or treatise of 
Maffaeus Celsus Yeronensis thus entitled : ^^ CeUi Veranemis 
Canonici regularis Lateranenais congregationis Dtssuasaria ne 
Cfhristiani prindpea ecclesiasticos usurpant census ; ad inclytum 
Venetorum senatum^ 1471.'' And before this again in the same 
volume are the letters commendatory which Urswick names. 
There is a copy of this work of Maffaeus Celsus Yeronensis 
in print but unpaged,t and the initial letters unsupplied: 
indicating secrecy of printing and probably suppression by 
the English authorities. The document is very interesting 
as bearing upon the times when the storm was brewing which 
at length broke in all its fury over England in the dissolution 
of the monasteries ; and the proceedings of King Henry the 
8th are in Urswick's letter clearly pointed at. 

On the 29th of December, 1520, Urswick writes from 
Hackney to the earl of Shrewsbury in language too guarded 
to convey any meaning to the uninitiated, viz., that he 

" Finds divers things to his comfort in the Earl's letter, received this St. 

• Hasted' s History of Kent ^ IV. 556. 
t B.M. Library, Press Mark 1412, d. 26. 


Thomas* day, by the bearer. First for the gentleman of the north country 
that hath been with you, and the cai)se of his coming and the likelihood of 
the good success thereof. Holds as good an opinion as ever of our old 
matter. Considering the nature of the party, if it be wisely handled, sees 
no way but by the man mentioned by his lordship, who must be won by the 
same means as all his profession. It had better be broken to him by the 
Earl than by my lady. Begs the Earl to pardon this letter, howsoever it is 
written, for peradventure,'' he says, "my mind is not so stable as it hath 
been, now after my great sickness. I thought myself within these fourteen 
days as near my death as ever I did, sith I had knowledge and remem- 
brance ; but by the help of God and good Master Frawncis, I am passed 
all danger."* 

Thus the Rector spoke of his declining health ; and on the 
30th of June in the year following, 1521, only nine months 
before his decease, he addressed the following epistle to Lord 
Darcy in the north : — 

" My dewty in the most humble wise remembered. It wolle please your 
good lordship to understand that as whereon John Halley, father to one 
Edward Halley, now being in his age, was seized of me in certain lands and 
tenements to the yearly value of xlvi.s. by year, in the cownte of York to the 
same held of me as of my manor of Baddesworth by knyghtley service, by 
reason of which noneage of the said Edward Halley, I was possessed of 
the said lands so holden of me for the space of five years, till that now of 
late one James Rawson and Christopher Bradford of their conseizing 
[conspiracy] together have, without color or title, wrongfully put me forth 
of the same ; of the which matter your lordship hath been troubled and 
taken pains for and in behalf, wherein I am bound to yield you my service. 
So it is that the king's grace has granted his gracious letter of commission 
to be directed to your worshippe and others for the hearing and determina- 
tion of the said wrongs and misdemeanours so committed and done to me 

• Shrewsbury MSS., A. 59 (2), Herald's Coll. 



by the said James Rawson and Christopher Bradford, wherein I shall 
beseech yonr lordship to take further pains in executing the tenour and 
effects of the said commission according to right and good consequence, so 
that in my age I may be out of trouble and business, and your lordshippe 
bind me to bear you any service and prayer. I leave, beseeching you to 
take credence to this bearer, my kinsman and deputy, William Banke,* for 
the said matter, who shall attend and wait upon you from time to time as 
shall please you to take for the hearing of the said matter by virtue of the 
said commission. And thus I beseech Jbsu to have your good lordshippe 
, in His blessed keeping. From Hackney, the 30th day of June. From your 

daily beedsman, Christopher Urswici(, to my right honorable lord, my 


There remains now nothing to be added to the records of 

Christopher Urswick, clerk (who held so numerous appoint- 

^ ments, and died simple Rector of Hackney on the 24th of 

1^ March in the year 1521, aged 74), except the purport of his 

last Will and Testament, and the place and method of his 
interment in the churchyard of the parish church of Hackney. 
Dr. Samuel Knight, in his Life ofHrasmus (pp. 73 sqq.), calls 
Urswiek ^^ one of the most considerable men of that age for 
piety and learning." Erasmus survived Urswiek fourteen 
years, dying at Basle, after much suffering both of body and 
mind, on the 4th of July, 1636. 

The last Will and Testament of Chmstopher Ueswick, 
dated the 10th of October, 1521, is preserved in the preroga- 

* Banke, probably Baugh. Doctor Baugh was, like Urswiek, one of the king's 
^ private almsgivers. 

t Lord Darcy was executed on Tower Hill for his participation in the rebellion 
called ^he Pilgrimage of Graces which preceded the dissolution of Fumess 


tive court of Canterbury, and a copy of the same may be 
seen at the probate court in Somerset House, London : — 

"Recommending his soul to God, his Creator, Maker, Saviour, and 
Redeemer of all the world ; to the blessed Lady St. Mary the Virgin, his 
glorious Mother, and all the holy company of Heaven, he directs that he 
may be buried before the image of St. Austin, and requests that there may 
be no solemn dyner or dole made, and that his funeral charges are not to 
exceed 20 marks. He leaves to his old poor man that comes to him from 
Kentish Town, 6s. 8d.; to Richard Humphrey and his wife, each 5s.; to 
Lincoln the labourer, 3s. 4d.; to John Ilbery*s mother-in-law, 3s. 4d.; to 
his gossip John Ilbery's wife's daughter, 3s. 4d.; to Johanna Chilman, 
widow, 38. 4d.; to Widow Pares dwelling under the loft, 5s.; to the parish 
clerk's wife and children (if they still dwell there), 6s. 8d.; to John with a 
sore arm, 20s.; and to Sir Richard's mother, 5s. 

"To the Priory of Hatfield Peverel for a Dirige and mass, 20s. 

" To the Abbot and Convent of Bylegh beside Maldon for a Dirige and 
mass, 20s. 

" To the Black Friars in Chelmsford, 40s. 

'* To the Chapel of our Lady of Walsingham, his vestment with both 
fronts, in his little closet above and beneath the altar. 

'*To Cuthbert Tunstall, master of the Rolls, his gown of black, furred 
with martron, his tippet of sarcenet, furred with sables, his little mule with 
saddle and bridle, and all his harness, and also his book of j^^ayers beginning 
Quoniam in medio laqueorum poiiti sumus, 

** To Sir John Barco, Priest and Vicar of Hackney, a black book written 
with pen which beginneth Audistis quia dictum est antiquis, 

** To Nicholas Yrton and his wife, my two silver pottle pots, two pairs of 
sheets, a pair of blankets and a coverlet, two plain tableclothes, two plain 
towels, six plain napkins, two platters, four porringers, and four saucers, 
besides all such things as I have put them in possession of myself." 

Referring again to John Ilbery, he says, *' I bequeath to John Ylber)% my 
servant, six silver trenchers." And 


** To the Abbey of Furness, the gilt cup that Sir Robert Southwell gave 
me, for a remembrance of the souls of my father and mother, sometime 
brother and sister of their chapter."* 

Then follows the disposition of debts and rents due or falling due from 
the farmers of his several benefices, viz., those owing by David Moyle and 
Walter Burlas, gentlemen farmers of the parsonage of St. Newlyn in 
Cornwall (being a parcel of Urswick's chancellorship in the cathedral 
church of Exeter), to be divided into three parts : the one part to be devoted 
to the charity called " for the marriage of poor maidens"! within the parish 
above-named, and the other two parts to be disposed towards the " exhibi- 
tion " of two poor scholars, viz., Christopher and William Hewster, or the 
longer liver of the two, and in the event of both dying before the money 
was expended, then to other scholars according to the discretion of the 


In like manner the debts of John Beer, farmer of the parsonage of Stoke 
Gabriel (another parcel of the aforesaid chancellorship), to be divided into 
two equal parts : the one part to be devoted to the charity above-named, 
and the other to the "exhibition" of Christopher Smyth {'*fny godson*^), or 
otherwise to a brother of his, or failing that, to some other scholars. , 

Also the debts of John Lawrence, receiver of his prebend of Bedwyn in 
the cathedral church of Salisbury, to be divided into two equal parts : the 
one part to the *' marriage of poor maidens " charity, and the other to the 
" exhibition " of poor scholars in Oxford and Cambridge. 

Also the debts of the same John Lawrence, being also receiver of his 
archdeaconry of North Wiltshire, to be divided into two parts : the one part 
to *'the charity" as established in the parish of Minety, and the other part 
to the said exhibition for both Universities. 

Also the debts of Thomas A. Price, farmer of his parsonage of Ashbury 

♦ Attached to the monastery were certain religious lay brethren, whose office 
was to cultivate the lands, and attend to the secular afiEairs of the monastic order. 
John Urswick was at Oxford in 1450. 

t This charity is (or was only lately) still existing. J Students of Oxford University. 


(Berks) in the diocese of Salisbtuy, into two parts : the one part to the 
charity aforesaid, and the other to be expended in the " mending of high- 
ways" within that parish. 

Also the debts of Sir Thomas Finnis, knt., being fanner of his parsonage 
of Felpham in the diocese of Chichester, into two parts : the one part to the 
same charity as existing in the parish of Felpham, and the other part to be 
delivered to his nephiw William Redman towards the reparation of his 
(Urswick's) school at Lancaster, 

Also the debts of Master John Canby, farmer of his pebend of Milton in 
the cathedral church of Lincoln, into two parts : the one part to the afore- 
said charity, and the other to be delivered to William Redman to distribute at 
his discretion among the daughters of his (Urswick's) nephew John A. Burgh. 

Also the debts of John Pynchester, farmer of his prebend of Chiswick in 
the cathedral church of St. PauFs in the city of London, to be wholly 
disposed towards the aforesaid charity, viz., for the "marriage of poor 

Also the debts of John Curate, receiver and scribe of his archdeaconry of 
Norfolk, to be divided into two equal parts : the one part to the exhibition 
of poor scholars in Oxford and Cambridge, and the other part to remain to 
the use of his executors towards the performance of this his present testa- 
ment and last will. 

Also he wills that all such persons as shall enjoy any of his said bequests, 
shall be commanded to pray for the souls of Sir John Huddleston, knight, 
and Dame Jane his wife, for the soul of him, the said Christopher, and all 
Christian souls. 

Also he wills that his executors sue the obligation of Sir William Sandys, 
knight, for the sum of twenty pounds, '* wherein he stands bound **; — ** the 
which obligation (says Urswick) I have taken unto my nephew William 
Redman for 'the same (like) sum of money laid out by him at my desire in 
repairing and making up the Freres and School House within the town of 

Also he continues, " I will that the great ring with the sapphire that I am 


alway wont to bear in my purse, be delivered to Master Cuthbbrt 
TuNSTALL, for it is his own.* 

''And I will that every one of my servants shall have half one year*s wages 
(viz., at the annual rate which they had been receiving).'' 

Also he wills that all these premises be performed by his executors, if his 
goods, moveables, and debts will thereto extend, and if not, then according 
to their discretion. 

Also he will have it known to all the world that he has no more of any 
man's goods in his keeping, nor debts to account for to his executors. 

He appoints as his executors, his most trusty friend and lover, Master 
Cuthbbrt Tunstall. Master of the Rolls, without control or survey ; also 
Master Richard Sparchford,! priest ; and William Lowth, goldsmith 
of London. 

Revokes and annuls any and all wills or codicils previously made, and 
should any goods or things remain in the hands of his executors after the 
provisions of his will have been carried out, by sale of his goods to the 
uttermost value, then he was content that they should keep any part 
thereof to their own proper use. Witnessed by William Stanlowe and 
Nicholas Ireton. 

Perhaps the Rector had a relapse of the illness of which he 
complained in his letter to the earl of Shrewsbury, or at least 
had some forebodings of his approaching end, for on the 
28th of December following, being then, as he says, *' whole 
of mind, and in good memory, loved be God," he adds a 
Codicil to the foregoing Will, in effect as follows : — 

•*I will that my sparberj of tawny sarcenet embroidered with double 

* Given to Urswick by poor, needy Cuthbert in exchange for a certain sum as a 
loan, and now Urswick cancels the debt. See letter of Tunstall given below. 

t Richard Sparchford, or Sparchfork, who succeeded Urswick in the living of 

X Sparber or sparver, " the canopy or tester of a bed," 
" At home, on silken sparvers, beds of down. 
We scant can rest, but still toss up and down." 
Harleian Epigrams. See Dictionary of Robert Nares. Anletts or annulets, rings, 
or hoops. Verdours or verdors, " leaves." 9 


anlettSt and curtains with black sarcenet with the counterpoint of verdours, 
and the feather bed and bolster of down thereto belonging, shall be sold by 
Biy executors to the most value, and the price thereof to be disposed by 
them after their discretion for the soul of John Ratclyff, sometime 
Serjeant of the cellar to King Henry the 7th. 

*' And whereas I received of Sir Stephen Jennings xl.s., viz., of my lady 
bis wife 20s., and of John Hosier, mercer, 20s., I will that my executors 
shall immediately after my death send the said money to the Freres at 
Lancaster, to pray for their souls, (as) I received it of (them), according to 
their wills and minds.* 

"Also whereas in my testament I have willed the one half of such debt 
as Master John Canby, farmer of my prebend of Milton in the cathedral 
church of Lincoln, shall owe to me at the hour of my death, to be delivered 
to my nephew William Redman, to be distributed at his discretion among 
the daughters of my nephew John A. Burgh ; now I will that if the said 
bequest do not extend to the sum of ^£20 sterling, that my executors shall 
make good the same bequest of ;^2o, of my moveable goods, and deliver it 
to my nephew aforesaid for the purpose^aforesaid." 

Also the testator/makes a similar proviso in the event of his executors 
not being able to obtain for Mr. Redman the amount of the debt of Sir 
William Sandysf (to be devoted by Mr. Redman to the Freres and school 
bouse of Lancaster), viz., that the amount is to be made good by the sale 
of his (the testator's) moveable goods, on the delivery of the obligation into 
the hands of the executors by the said Mr. William Redman. 

Also the testator goes on to add that ** whereas in my testament I willed 
that every one of my servants should have one half year's wages after the 
rate as they take, my mind is, that the same quarter that I shall die in shall 

♦ Viz., the souls of Sir Stephen and his lady and of Mr. John Hosier. Possibly 
"my lady" had been somewhat extravagant in dress, and Mr. John Hosier felt 
his conscience too somewhat pricked by her ladyship's cash. 

t According to Thos. West, this family of Sandys were flourishing in 1591; they 
seem to have been a very influential and prosperous family. 


be counted for one quarter of the said half year ; and they shall have 
another quarter's wages besides, so that with both they will have one half 
year's wages. Also I bequeath (over and above) to every one of my servants 
for one month's board wages, 6s. 8d. And I will that my executors do pay 
my said servants immediately after my death their said wages, as board 
wages, etc., as I have declared, without any respite or delay, as parcel of my 


"And I will that my executors (as they shall answer before God) pay, or 
cause to be paid, immediately after my death all the bequests I have given 
to poor folks, religious, and others as specified, without any differing for 
any causes. 

•• I will and bequeath to Master Richard Sparchforth, one of my executors, 
5 marks sterling, and to William Louth, my other executor, £$ sterling/' 

Both will and codicil were proved on the 11th of April, 
1522 (viz., eighteen days after the death of Christopher), in 
the presence of Vice-Chancellor Cuthbert Tunstall and Master 
Andrew Smyth, solicitor.* 

A short time before his decease, Urswick was actively 
engaged with Sir John Heron,t master of the jewel bouse 
to Henry the 8th, in the rebuilding of the church of St. 
Augustine,^: Hackney. It consisted of a nave, chancel, and 
two aisles. Between each arch of the nave the arms of 
Heron were carved in stone. The same arms occurred on 
one side of the chancel windows ; on the other side the arms 
of Urswick. Possibly it was the chancel only that was 

♦ Probably the father of Christopher Smyth, Urswick' a godson. 

t His son, Giles Heron, had a daughter, the wife of Sir Thomas More, and 
shared the fate of his son-in-law, viz., executed for *' high treason/' so called, by 
Henry the 8th. 

X Finally pulled down in 1799. The church of St. John's was built contiguous 
to its site. 


rebuilt by Heron and Urswick, and the nave and tower 
remained as they have been btiilt in the 14th century, or 
rather rebuilt, from a still earlier period. Whatever these 
restorations, rebuildings, or reparations may have been, it 
appears evident that either during their progress, or on their 
completion, Urswick designed, and caused to be erected on 
the north side of the chancel, an altar of white freestone, as a 
shrine of the patron saint, Austin or Augustine of Canterbury. 
It appears that this altar was utilized for Easter offerings, 
and for the ancient ceremony of watching on Ea&ter eve 
through the night some representation of the Holy Sepulchre. 
This would not detract from the conjecture that it was 
intended as a shrine of St. Austin, and was made the receptacle 
of that image of which Urswick speaks in his will. 

The altar bore at summit and base (and still bears), carved 
in the stone, Urswick's family shield of three lozenges on a 
bend. The table was plain, and also the back or reredos, 
with the exception of the date 1619 (viz., that of its inaugu- 
ration), and beneath the date, Ctri8t0j]^0r0 oJrufojjke, |lertaw, 
and again below his name, M.I.A., an abbreviation of 
Miserecordiay " Mercy." Urswick was buried, as he desired in 
his will, before (or in front of) the image of St. Austin, that is 
to say, in front of the altar which he had himself executed, 
and which evidently must have contained or supported such 
an image. On the pavement which covered his gi^ave were 
placed two brass plates, the one being his effigy in full 
canonicals, the other a legend which runs thus : — 


Christopherus Urswicus, Regu Hen. VII. EUemosynariuSj 
vir sua aetate clarusy summatibua atque infimatibus juzta charuSy 
ad exteros Reges undecies pro patria Ugatus. Dec. Ebor. Archd. 
Richmond, Decanatum Windesor hahitos vivens reliquit Episc. 
Norwicensem oblatum recttsavtt; magnos honored tota vita sprevit: 
frugali vita contenius hie vivere^ hie mori maluit. Plenus annis 
obiity ab offinibus desideratuSy funeris pompam etiam Testamento 
vetuity hie sepultuSy camis resurrectianem in adventum Christi 
expeciat Obiit anno Christi incamati MDXXIy die 24 Martiiy 
anno aetatis suae LXXIIIL 

"Christopher Urswick, almoner of King Henry VII.; a 
man eminent in his age, beloved alike by the highest and the 
lowest; eleven times ambassador for his country to foreign 
kings. The deanery of York, the archdeaconry of Richmond, 
and the deanery of Windsor, during his life he resigned. 
The bishopric of Norwich which was offered him, he refused. 
Through all his days he spurned great honours. Content 
with a simple life he preferred here to live and die. He 
departed full of years, lamented by all. Even in his will he 
forbade funeral pomp. Here buried he awaits the resurrec- 
tion of the flesh at the coming of Christ. He expired on the 
24th of March* in the year of our Lord Incarnate 1521, in the 
74th year of his age." 

This old church of St. Augustine, Hackney, was repaired 
about 1721, but being found too small for the requirements 
of the parish, various estimates for repairing or rebuilding 

* The last day but one of the old style of year ending the 25th March. 


were made in 1756 ; the present building, called St. John's, 
was commenced in May, 1792, was consecrated 15th July, 
1797; the steeple and porches were not added until 1812. 

The picturesque old church, hard by, was finally demolished 
in the year 1798, and it was an act of good taste that the 
altar erected by Christopher Urswick was eventually removed 
to a place of honour in the principal porch of the new 
building, the plate on which the legend is engraved, and that 
containing his effigy, having been affixed to the same, — viz., 
the legend on the back or reredos, and the effigy on the table 
of the altar. Some shields of arms formerly existed upon the 
effigy plate, but they are effaced. The spot where still rest 
the bones of this ancient rector, now unmarked by any stone, 
has been enclosed and partly utilised as a place of sepulture 
for the members of the family of Tyssen, lords of the manor 
of Hackney.* 

The visitor to the altar in the porch of the present church 

* John Robert Daniel Tyssen, D,L., F.S.A., was the third son of A^^iliam 
George Daniel Tyssen, of Foley House, Kent, and of Hackney. Singularly the 
second son (the elder brother of John Robert), viz., Captain Charles Amherst 
Daniel Tyssen, died, aged 70, on the day previous to the decease of his brother 
John Robert, viz., on the 10th June, 1882. These were uncles of Mr. Tyssen- 
Amherst, M.P., of Didlington Hall, Norfolk, and lord of the manor of Hackney. 
The wife of Wm. Geo. Daniel Tyssen was Amelia, daughter of John Amherst. 
He died on the nth June, 1882, at his residence, 9, Lower Rock Gardens, 
Brighton, aged 77. Much of the information here given we have received from 
the late Mr. Tyssen, and also from the Rev. J. W. Kenworthy, curate of Hackney 
parish church, who pointed out the spot whence the brasses were removed, on the 
old pavement, and described with minuteness the nature of the old Easter cere- 
monies, asd the robes which Rector Urswick wore. 


of Hackney cannot fail to be struck with the fitness of tlie 
same as a recipient of the memorial brasses; it seems 
powerfully to suggest the idea that the old rector had '* an 
eye to the future" when he erected it, and wished to be 
remembered, as he certainly desired to be. Four days after 
his death, viz., on the 28th of March, a royal grant of the 
presentation of the living of Hackney was delivered at 
Hampton Court to Richard Sparchforth, M.A., ** vice Chris- 
topher Urswick, clerk, deceased." The living was at the 
king's disposal by reason of the voidance of the see of 
London, William Haryngton, LL.D., being keeper of the 

Also by another grant issued on that day from Newhall, 
and delivered at Hampton Court on the 1st April, Richard 
Sampson, LL.D., was presented to a canonry in St. Paul's 
Cathedral, vice Christopher Urswick, deceased, — also in the 
king's gift by reajson of the vacancy of the see of London. 

On the 27th of March (preceding the issue of these two 
grants) Cuthbert Tunstal, then bishop of London, had written 
to Cardinal Wolsey as follows : — 

" I thank you for writing to the king, for the preferment of my chaplain 
to the benefice of Hackney. The king has signed the warrant of presenta- 
tion enclosed in the said letter, and I now send it by my clerk for you to 
seal when convenient. My servant, whom I sent to court, reports that he 
heard that the king had given the prebend of Cheswyke to Dr. Sampson, of 
which I am glad because he is worthy, and because Urswyk favoured him 
for Southwell's sake. To the lord Cardinal of York, Legate de Latere, and 
Chancellor of England." 


Three years later when Tunstal had been oommiasioned, 
with Sir Robert Wingfield, to undertake an embassy to Spain, 
to demand of the emperor Charles the release of the captive 
king of France, under somewhat heavy conditions to the 
latter, we find, dated 14th of April, 1525, and written from 
Hampton, another letter from him to the Cardinal in which, 
after treating of other matters, says : — 

" I thank you and the king for the promise of the see of Ely, if the 
bishop*s sickness prove fatal ; but although the revenue is more than double 
what I could spend, I must refuse it for the following reasons : — Firstly, I 
am in debt for the last (papal) bulls, though I have sold all my plate, but 
what I carry with me ; secondly, my friends, from whom I borrowed more 
than half the sum, viz., Urswick, Lovell, Ashton your surveyor, the bishop 
of Durham, and others, are dead ; thirdly, my own friends and kinsmen who 
were bound for me, are not able to help me, and would be loth to incur any 
more risk for me, as I saw when I was sick last year ; fourthly, I perceive 
by the trouble I have had even at home to get money for this voyage, how 
impossible it would be to get help when absent ; and the fifth and chief is, 
that if I should, for ambition of more promotion and dying in the mean- 
time, do irreparable damage through my great debts to those friends whom 
hitherto I have not helped, I should thus both jeopard my soul, and undo 
my friends for their kindness towards me, which I would be loth to do,** 

It will be noted by referring to the records of Sir Thomas 
Urswick, Recorder of London, that he was succeeded in that 
office by Hmnphrey Starkey, being one of a northern family, 
viz., the Starkeys of Huntroyd; and now we gather some 
notes of another member of that family in the person of Mr. 
Lawrence Starkey, also like Humphrey, a man of laws, who 
on the 27th of May, 1525, was appointed by the lord abbot 


of the monastery of Fumess to assemble and attend all the 
leet courts^ sheriff's turns, and sessions of Peace to be held 
at Dalton or within the liberties thereof at appointed times, 
and to issue all writs and processes in due form ; for which 
services he was to receive for the term of his life an annual 
stipend, payable at Michaelmas and Easter, of £6 13s. 4d., a 
gown of the livery of the abbot and convent, and all costs 
incurred on such occasions by him and his servants for meat, 
drink, parchment paper, and horse fodder. 

On the 27th of July in the following year, 1526, this 
Lawrence Starkey, gentleman, writes to Thomas Cromwell, 
counsellor to the Cardinal, stating that he was bound for the 
late Lord Monteagle to Christopher Urswick for the farm of a 
benefice, which although (he asserts) it had been paid for 
eighteen years before Urswick's decease, that now the bishop 
of London had sued him for it in Middlesex, and had had him 
condemned in £30 and £4 costs, of which (says Mr. Starkey) 
nothing is due. Asks for his (Cromwell's) help, sends 6s. 8d. 
in gold as a memorial, and promises to remember him better 
when his (Starkey's) client Richard Coupland comes. 

In another letter bearing same date, he tells Cromwell that 
*^ he is bound for the said late Lord Monteagle to Christopher 
Urswyk in several other obligations, for two of which Lord 
FitzJames and Mr. FitzHerbert had awarded him and two 
others to be bound to Urswyk's executors to pay £35 at 
certain days, which bond must be delivered to the justices or 
vice-chancellor at Lancaster assizes the Monday after Vincula 


St Peter ; as further obligations are yet pending, wishes to 
know Wolsey^s pleasure, for if he does not keep his bond, it 
will ruin him. Hears that an adversary has lodged an untrue 
information against him to (Lord) Norfolk in order to prevent 
him from keeping his day. The bearer will tell him (Crom- 
well) how that Wolsey bade him (Starkey) to find surety that 
he would be forthcoming, to take the serjeant-at-arms with 
him, or go to the Fleet and take a keeper, and that (then) he 
should be set at large. Had replied to Wolsey that the term 
was ended, and the gentlemen of his (Starkey' s) country 
departed. Wishes Cromwell to ask Wolsey why he must find 
surety, for he (Starkey) knows not." 

We gain no further notes or tidings as to what befell this 
old Urswick family beyond as already shewn, the mere 
existence of an obscure and now quite extinct branch in 
London, and the Shropshire family with the name slightly 
corrupted, whose name first appears at '^Felhampton" in 
1524, viz., two years after the death of Christopher, and 
between four and five years after the death of his nephew 
Thomas Urswick, of Lancashire. Although they first appear 
as a small family, holding a few hundred acres at a remark- 
ably low rent, a sufficient time had elapsed for their great 
impoverishmentj^through a combination of causes, viz., their 
alliance and attachment^to the once powerful but now com- 
paratively ruined house of the Haryngtons; their futile 
efforts to lay claim to the Badsworth estate which had passed 
from them by failure in male issue, to the family of Vavasor 


in 1510; the same thing occurring with regard to Thomas 
Urswick, of Lancashire, ten years later, when his lands passed 
to the Redman family ; and possibly also a lack of enterprize 
and a too great love of retirement, which may have been 
cherished among them through their deep attachment to the 
monastery of Furness. 

When we read that the inhabitants of Yorkshire in general 
were malcontents in the reign of Henry VII., still adhering 
to the extinguished house of York, and hating the reigning 
monarch; — that the Haryngton family by their obstinate 
indulgence in that feeling, lost nearly all their possessions, — 
and find that the Urswicks were their tenants and near 
kinsmen, we may reasonably conjecture that their political 
tendencies were similar, setting aside the example shewn in 
Sir Thomas Urswick the Recorder. And this will probably 
explain why Christopher, whose life was such a contrast to 
theirs, makes no mention of them, or any one of them, in his 
last will and testament. There is evidence, however, that 
his memory was tenderly cherished by some northern families, 
if we may take that of Rawlinson, one of its oldest and most 
enduring, as an example; for we read in Clutterbuck's 
History of Herts, that under the great window against the 
north wall of the transept of St. Albans Abbey there is a 
white marble sarcophagus to the memory of Christopher 
Rawlinson, of Cark Hall in Cartmel, Lancaster, who was 
bom the 13th of June, 1677, and died in January, 1733, and 
was the son of Curwen Rawlinson, M.P. for Lancaster. This 


Christopher Rawlinson himself appointed the mason who was 
to make the monument, bequeathed £200 to pay for it, and 
£100 towards the repairs of the church ; and by a codicil 
directed that if he could not be buried where he desired, he 
might be buried in UrswicVd Chapel in St. George^s, Windsor, 
and the £100 given to that chapel instead of to this church. 


gi«»olttti0n 0f \\t l^ona^terg 0f ^m\\t%%. 

OW although the migration of a branch of the 
Urswick family into Salop was probably effected 
in the reign of Henry the 7th, and the dissolution 
of the monastery of Fumess was not until the 28th year of 
the succeeding reign, viz., thirteen years after we obtain the 
first record of the Felhampton family (in the form of a 
subsidy levied there), yet the destruction of an ancient and 
religious institution to which they had been devoted since its 
foundation, deserves some notices in passing. 

That such a revolution as that involved in the dissolution 


of the monasteries throughout Britain was accomplished with 
so great ease and so little resistance, is in itself evidence that 
those hoary institutions scattered over the land had utterly 
lost the respect and confidence of the people. For at least 
two centuries before Henry VIII. the monasteries, great as 
well as small, had been centres and nests of rapacity, tyranny, 
and profligacy. The monks ruled the country round, 
imposed heavy taxes upon the farmers, made the poor their 
serfs, exacted heavy tolls and tithes upon all produce, and 
compelled the people to bring their com to be taxed and 
ground as a monopoly at the abbey mills. A large chamber, 
for example, in St. Albans Abbey was payed with the querns 
which the armed servants of the abbot had seized through 
the country round, and on occasion of the peasants' revolt in 
1381 the old annalist in the Gesta tells us how the leaders 
broke up this pavement, and distributed fragments of the 
querns among the people ^^like the holy bread at the 
eucharist," as the memorials of their former thraldom and 
their dearly -purchased freedom. The revolt failed; the 
monasteries had a new lease of power ; but at length their 
cup of iniquity was full. '' Now was the axe laid to the root 
of the tree of abbeys,'' says Fuller, and he quotes the 
preamble of the statute for dissolution of the lesser mona- 
steries : — 

" Forasmuch as manifest sin, vicious, carnal, and abominable living is 
daily used and committed commonly in little and small abbeys, and the 
governors of such religious houses spoil, destroy, consume as well the 
churches, houses, farms, lands, tenements ... to the high displeasure of 


Almighty God, and mady visitations for the past two hundred years for an 
honest reformation have failed; . . . the Lords and Commons of this 
present Parliament resolve that the possessions of such small religions 
houses should be used and converted to better uses." " All I will add is," 
says Fuller, "God first punished great Sodom, and spared little Zoar, though 
probably also in fault. Here Zoar was first punished; let great Sodom 
beware, and the larger monasteries look to themselves." 

Bishop Burnet writes : — '' I now come to consider how the visitors carried 
on their visitations. Many severe things were said of their proceedings, 
but by their letters to Cromwell it appears that in most houses they found 
monstrous disorders."* 

Some of the larger abbeys hoped to resist, and raised a 
commotion first in Xincolnshire, when Dr. Mackrel, friar of 
Barlings, collected a large company, of which he took the 
lead under the assumed name of the ^* Captain Cobbler/' A 
proclamation of pardon from the king was effectual in 
dispersing this gathering, while the doctor, Lord Hussey, and 
a number of other leaders were publicly executed. 

Another insurrection, called the "Pilgrimage of Grace,'' 
was headed by Robert Aske,t a gentleman of family residing 
at Aughton, in the East Riding of York. The priests and 

• Fuller, Church History^ book VI., §3 ; Burnet, History of the Reformation^ 
part I., book 3. 

t The old £amily of Aske, to which this misguided gentleman belonged, whose 
original estate bears their name (now but late tlie seat of Lord Dundas), is 
described by Whitaker as a long line of descendants from one of the earliest 
grantees and favourites of the first Earls of Richmond, and their manor as one of 
those gems of which even those mi^ty lords had not many to bestow. This was 
in all probability referring to their estate of Aughton which either derived or gave 
that family name of '' Aughton.'' In those feudal days of great landed property 
the lords thereof were much " given to change." 


their deyotees entered into this with great ardour. The 
abbots of Whalley, Salley, Jervauz, Fumess, Fountains, and 
Rivanlx, with all the persons they conld influence, either 
joined the main body, or made diyemons in its favour in 
their respective districts. Having carried the town of Hull 
and the city of York, they attacked Pontefract Castle. The 
Earl of Shrewsbury, the Earl of Derby, and other noblemen 
raised a force to resist the progress of the rebellion. Lee, 
the archbishop of York, and Lord Darcy, who were then in 
possession of Pontefract Castle, surrendered the fortress to 
the rebels without resistance. 

The herald arrived at Pontefract with a proclamation from 
the king, and was received by Aske, seated on a kind of 
throne, with the archbishop of York on his right and Lord 
Darcy on his left, and attended by Sir Robert Constable, Sir 
Christopher Danby, and others. They refused submission to 
what the proclamation required. 

The insurgents were afterwards repulsed by the Earl of 
Cumberland, in an attack made upon Skipton Castle. After 
twice failing through a sudden rising of the waters, in an 
endeavour to ford the Don, this rebel army was at last 
dispersed. But a fresh disturbance broke out in the northern 
extremity of Lancashire, under Musgrave and Tilley ; similar 
risings took place in Hull and other places. Mr. Robert Aske, 
the leader of the " Pilgrimage of Grace," was tried and 
executed, as were also Sir Robert Constable, Sir John Buhner, 
Sir John Percy, Sir Stephen Hamilton, Nicholas Tempest, 


and William Lumbey. Many others were thrown into prison, 
and most of them shared the fate of their leader. Lord 
Darcy's plea of having surrendered the castle of Pontefract 
on compulsion was disregarded^ and his advanced age of 80 
years, many of them spent in the service of his country, did 
not gain for him the royal clemency, and he was executed on 
Tower Hill. 

'* The Pilgrimage of Grace " dispersed itself, says Beck, rather than was 
suppressed. The king published anew a general pardon ; but at the spring 
assizes at Lancaster in 1537, John Paslew, abbot of Whalley, was sentenced 
to death for high treason on account of the part he had taken. Also 
William Trafford, abbot of Salley, and the prior thereof, also John Eastgate 
and William Haydocke, monks of Whalley, also Adam Sudbury, abbot of 
Jervaulx, and Ashbred, a monk of the same priory, and William Wold, prior 
of Burlington, were all executed at Lancaster, as leaders in the insurrection^ 

With reference to Fumess Abbey,* it was surrendered on 
the 9th of April, 1 537, in manner as follows : — 

All the members of the community, with the tenants and 
servants, were successively examined in private, and the 

• The monks were Cistercian, an order of Benedictines, taking their name from 
Cistartium, now Citeaux, in the bishopric of Chalons in Burgundy, about the year 
1 1 00. They wore at first black, then grey, and afterwards white cassock, cowl, 
and scapulary all of wool. They were distinguished for their abstinence, their 
rations being designated d^pUtance ox pittance, Stephen Hardy was the first to 
establish the order in England. See Beck, Annates Furnenstenses, p. 25, who 
says regarding the monasteries in general, " Wealth begot ease, ease induced 
luxury, and luxury precipitated its decay and ruin. . . . The exorbitant wealth, 
the arrogant usurpations, and scandalous manners of these societies effectually 
estranged them from the sympathy and bounty of the people. Vos Manachi^ 
vestri stomachic sunt amphora Bacchic Vos estis^ Deus est testis, deterrima 
Pestis** X^p. 58, 91, loi). 


remit of a protracted enqiury waa, Hiat thoxigli itwo monlos* 
were for some misdeoMancmr eommitted to Lancaster Castle, 
nothing could be discovered to criminate the broUiwhood. 
The commissioners proceeded to Whalley, and a new sum- 
mons compelled the abbot of Fumess to appear before them ; 
a second myestigation was instituted , and 'Qxe result was the 

^^ In these circumstances/' «ays the Earl of SusseZi in a 
letter to King Henry, which is still extant, ^^ devising with 
myself, if one way would not suit, how and by what means 
the said monks might be rid from the said abbey, and 
consequently how the same might be at your gracious 
pleasure, I determined to assay him (the lord abbot) of 
myself whether he would be contented to surrender, give, and 
grant unto you, your heirs and assigns the said monastery ; 
which thing so opened to the abbot fairly, we found him of a 
very facile and ready mind to follow my advice in that 
behalf." A deed was accordingly drawn up and signed by 
the abbot as follows : — 

^^ I, Roger, Abbot of Fumess, knowing the misorder and 
evil lif e^ both unto G-od and our Prince, of the Brethren of 
the said Abbey, in discharging of my conscience do freely 
and wholly surrender to Henry all the title and interest 
which I possess in the Monastery of Fumess, its lands and its 
revenues, binding myself to confirm and ratify this my 

• Beck mentioDSthe following: — "Fumess mconHnentia^ Rogdrus^Pele cum 

duabus solutis. Johannes Groyn cum soluta. Thomas Honiby cum sohUa. 



purpose, mindi and intent, which cometh freely of myself , 
and without any enforcement, in consideration of the evil 
disposition of the Brethren of the said Monastery. At 
Whalley Abbey, ^ April, 28th of Henry Vni."» 

Thirty-three monks signed the deed of surrender. Officers 
were immediately despatched to take possession in the name 
of the king. The commissioners followed with the abbot in 
their company, and in a few days the whole conununity 
ratified the deed of their superior. To the abbot, Roger 
Pele, was awarded the rectory of Dalton, value £33 Gs. 8d. ; 
the other superiors received liberal pensions, the priors of 
cells £13 to £20, and the monks two to six pounds per 
annum, in addition to a departure fee to provide for their 
immediate wants ; to the nuns about £4, etc. Thus it will 
be seen that those connected with the monastery were not 
the great sufferers by this event, but those who held the 
lands by service and fealty or by rent to the abbot. 

71)e sappression of the monasteries being in some cases entrusted to 
ignorant and interested individuals, was attended with the scattering or 
destruction of their libraries. *' Some of those who purchased the mona- 
steries" (says Bayle, Bishop of Ossary) "used the books to scour their 
candlesticks and rub their boots ; some they sold to the grocers and soap- 
sellers, and sent others over sea to bookbinders by ships full, to the great 
wonder of foreign nations. One merchant bought the contents of two 
libraries for 40s., and used them in the stead of grey paper for more than 
ten years, having then store enough for as many years to come." 

To shew how heedlessly, carelessly, and without any reasonably fair 

• Beck, Annales FurnensienseSy p. 346. The original is preserved in the 
British Museum Library, MS. Cotton. Cleopatra, £ 4, folio 246. 


consideration King Heniy the 8th granted away a monastery, the following 
story is told concerning Fumess. Sir Thomas Curwen at that time was an 
excellent archer at twelve-score marks. He had a shooting bout with the 
king at the period of the dissolution of the larger monasteries, the smaller 
having already been suppressed ; on which occasion his majesty said to 
him, " CuRWBN, why doth thee not beg some of these abbeys ? I would 
fain gratify thee in some way"; to which Sir Thomas replied, " Thank you, 
sire, I would desire of thee the Abbey of Fomeis, which is nigh to me, for 
twenty-one years/* "Take it," quoth the king, "for ever." "It will be 
long enough," said Sir Thomas, " for you will set them up again in that 
time." But they were not likely to be again set up, old Fumess was gone 
for aye, and Sir Thomas Curwen sent his son-in-law, Mr. Preston, to renew 
the lease for him, and this young Mr. Preston forthwith renewed it in his 
own name ; which act when Sir Thomas, his father-in-law, questioned him 
thereupon, he justified by saying, " You shall have it as long as you live, 
and I think I may as well have it with your daughter, as any other man "; 
to which point-of-law and right with none to contest it, no doubt old Sir 
Thomas was well content to agree, in his daughtei^s behalf. 

The interval between the abandonment and the ruin of an 
edifice like this was but short. Soon after the appropriation 
of the funds to the use of the state, the building itself began 
to decay, and a structure that would have weathered the 
storms of a thousand winters, if cherished and supported by 
timely reparations, soon sank into a state of dilapidation. 

Some of the painted glass from the noble east window is 
preserved at Bowness, Windermere. The window consisted 
of seven compartments, on three of which were depicted in 
full proportion the Crucifixion with the Virgin Mary on the 
right and the beloved disciple on the left of the cross. The 
rest of the window was filled up with other Scripture subjects, 

148 naoosoB op tsb family or uwwick. 

and the arms of several benefactors, amongst whom were 
Lancaster, Urswick, Haryngton, and Fleming. Through the 
four centuries during which this religious house flourished, its 
revenues were continually being extended. Many broad acres 
of the great families in the district, the barons of Kendal, 
the Broughtons, Huddlestons, Kirkbys, Penningtons, etc., 
nearly the whole of Fumess, and all the advowsons of the 
district except one, had come at length to be in their hands. 
They ruled like petty monarchs, maintaining a large force of 
armed retainers, besides being able to claim special military 
services from many of their vassals. 

In conclusion, let us quote Judge Blackstone's words on 
this last kind of dissolution, which he calls ^^a kind of 
suicide," and proceeds to say that "it is the civil death of 
the corporation; in this case,'' he adds, "the lands and 
tenements shall revert to the person or his heirs, who granted 
them to the corporation, which may endure for ever ; but 
when that life is determined by the dissolution of the body 
politic, the grantor takes it back by reversion as in the case 
of every other grant for life; and hence it appears how 
injurious, as well to private and public right, these statutes 
were which vested in King Henry the 8th, instead of the 
heir of the founder, the lands of the dissolved monasteries." 


|HESE we shall severally mention, following in the 
main the order in which the marriages occur in the 
pedigree and in the foregoing records. 

Le Fleming of Aldingham, Coniston, and now of Rydal, 

This ancient and still-enduring family are descended in 
direct line from the first Sir Michael le Fleming, who being 
related to Baldwin, Earl of Flanders, was sent to assist 
William of Normandy, brother-in-law of Baldwin, when he 
invaded this country. 

At that period he bore the name of Michael de Foumeys 
(or " of Fumess "), being, we suppose, originally a native of 
Furness, or Foumeys, in the Netherlands. He was knighted 
by the Conqueror, and was sent into Cumberland to bring 
into subjection the Scottish partisans of Edwin and Morcar. 
For his prowess and success he, was rewarded with the 
manors of Aldingham and Gleaston in Lancashire, and also 
with a grant of Beckermet Castle, sometimes called Carnaer- 
von Castle, in Cumberland, from^William de Meschiens, to 


which were added seyeral contigaouB manors in Coupland, 
afterwards called Egremont. 

Sir Michael lived to an extreme old age, which was a great 
hlessing to his vassals the Saxon families, who had been 
dispossessed of their estates by the Norman invader ; to those, 
for example, who had formerly been mien lords of Aldingham, 
for we find Sir Michael bestowing upon different members of 
that family several grants of land from his own demesnes 
which formed a nucleus of future prosperity, raising them at 
length to an influential position in the county. Sir Michael 
shewed much prudence in his worldly affairs ; we have an 
example of his astuteness in persuading the abbot of Fumess 
to accept the villages of Gremelton and Ross, which were 
afterwards nearly swallowed up by the encroachment of that 
branch of the sea called Leven Water, in exchange for the 
still enduring villages, high and dry, of Bardsea and Urswick. 
Sir Michael was mindful of his future possessions, the abbot 
thought only of the fishing. He gave his old name of 
Foumeys to all that island, and especially to the site of the 
newly-erected monastery, formerly known as Howgen-on- 

The second Sir Michael, son and heir of the above, 
bequeathed the manor of Aldingham to his son William. 
The original hall of Aldingham was destroyed by the rising 
of the waters, at the same time with the partial inundation of 
Ross and Cremelton, and the family then resided at their 
castle of Gleaston. The great grandson of Sir William le 


Pfeming, to whom tJie manor of Aldingham descended, was 
unfortunately drowned in Leren Water, and having no issue, 
his only sister Alice inherited the estate. 

From this Alice le Fleming, by a series of matrimonial 
aniances, with the families of Oancefield, Haryngtoil, and 
Bonville, we trace a descent to those hapless victims, Henry 
GFrey and his daughtier Lady Jane. And now we retrace our 
steps, and take up the descendants of the second son of the 
first Sir Michael, who at' the period of this sad episode Were 
residing at Beckermet CaiBtle; and who in consequence of 
that calamity, removed to Fm^ess. It was at this time thai* 
the marriage took place between Sir Richard le Fleming, late 
of BiBckermet, and Elizabeth, daughter of Adam de nRSWici:, 
by which the family of Le Fleming acquired the manor of 
Coniston* and other possessions, which the Urswicks had 
inherited by an original grant ittade tb them by Grilbeit 

Sir Richard le Fleming had a son and heir, John, who 
succeeded to the whole of his father's estates in Cumberland 
and Lancashire. He omitted to take out his patents of 
knighthood, and in this he followed the caution and prudence 
of his ancestor. By the stattite every gentleman possessing 
a rental of £20 was compelled to titke out his patents of 
knighthood, or " fine for the impediments ''; but there was 
0ome degree of pomp and circumstance attending these 

* Old prints of Coniston HaU are extinct ; the publishers melted down the plates 
for the value of the copper. The lovely manor no publishers can melt down. 


ceremonies by which candidates for knightly honours were 
put to great expense, and it was sometimes more prudent to 
submit to the risk of any slight penalty that might attach to 
non-confoimity with the edict. John le Fleming was not 
thereby hindered from doing good service, for he was dis- 
tinguished for his achievements in the Scottish wars of 
Edward I., and also in the seige of Caerlaveroke, for which 
he was rewarded by the king with a protection for himself 
and all his men from all amerciaments. 

Next in succession comes Rayneres le Fleming, also called 
Dapifer, on account of his filling the office of steward to the 
king. But we must skip a few generations (for the complete 
history of this family would be a work in itself), during which 
they formed alliances with the houses of **De Turribus" or 
^^Le Towers," lords of Lowick, the Kirkbys of Kirkby Ireleth, 
the Bardseas of Bardsea, etc., and we arrive at the reign of 
Henry IV., when a treaty of marriage was entered upon 
between Sir Thomas le Fleming, in behalf of his son Thomas, 
and Sir John de Lancaster, in behalf of his daughter Isabel, 
which being by all parties agreed to, young folks included, 
and Sir John de Lancaster being the fortunate possessor of 
Rydal Hall, he bestowed the same with the manor and lord- 
ship thereunto pertaining upon his daughter the bride as her 
portion. It was arranged that the manor of Coniston should 
be settled upon the issue of this marriage, which occurred in 
the year 1409. Young Sir Thomas resided alternately at 
Coniston and Rydal. 


Rydaly or Ryedale, valley of rye, had become the property 
of the house of Lancaster by a grant made in 1280 by 
Margaret, widow of Robert de Ros, to Roger de Lancaster, 
from whom it passed to the Lancasters of Howgill, of whom 
the Lady Isabel above-named was one of the co-heiresses. 
The old hall stood in the Low Park on the south side of the 
Kendal road ; nought of it remains but ruined walls and ^ 
fishponds. The more modem building is on the north side 
of the road. 

The next generation of Le Fleming is marked by an 
alliance with Broughton of Broughton Towers,* a fine old 
family which was about 67 years later brought to complete 
ruin through Sir Thomas Broughton espousing the cause of 
the duchess of Burgundy, when she put forward the preten- 
sions of Lambert Simnel as a means to subvert the govern- 
ment of Henry Vll. 

John Fleming, Esq., next in succession, is the first of the 
family named as ^*of Rydal Hall." Here Sir John lived, 
and here in 1532 he died, and was interred in the burying- 
place of the former lords of Rydal. 

In the two generations following, alliances were formed 
with the families of ISuddletons of Milium Castle, the 
Lowthers of Sewborrow, Cumberland, the Middletons of 
Middleton Hall, Westmoreland, and others of similar position. 

In the reign of Elizabeth, William Fleming resided at 

* Gregson says that the Bradshaws were quartered with Urs wicks (among- 
many other families) through an alliance with Houghton of Houghton Tower. 


Goniston Hall, which at a great cost he enlarged and beauti- 
fied ; BOme old carvings hare been preserved which shew the 
date and initial letters of his and his ladies' names. It appears 
that he lived rather too magnMcendy, and for a time greatly 
veduoed the fortunes of his house; but after his death in 
1597, his widow Agnes, who survived him about 33 years, 
being a lady of great spirit, prudence, and foresight, did at 
much self^-sacrifice, so greatly increase her store, that she not 
only succeeded in providing for and obtaining desirable 
marriages tbr her six dliughters, but also in repurchasing 
much of the property which had been disposed ofj and 
eventually in adding to the estates the manor and lordship of 
Skirwith, the lordship of Eirkland, and the demesne of Monk 
HftH ia Cumberland. Three of the daughters were her own, 
the others by her late husband's earlier marriage with 
Margaret, daughter of Sir John Lamplugh, of' Lampliigh, 
Cumberland. Agnes was a sister of Lord Bindlos, of Berwick. 
Besides the three daughters, she had of her own family 
four sons. 

The third son William distinguished himself in the ship 
that first disoovered the Spanish Armada in 1588. When the 
eldest son John mamed, his mother retired to Rydal Hall, 
when she died on the 16th August, 1631, and was buried a* 

This eldest son and heir, John Fleming, was thrice married. 
^i« second wife was a daughter of Sir William Norris, of 
Speake, but he had no family until for the third time he 


married, when his wife Dorothy, daughter of Sir Thomas 
Strickland, of Sizergh, Westmoreland, presented him with a 
son and two daughters. John was both sheriff and justice of 
the peace at different periods of the reign of James I. ; in the 
succeeding reign of King Charles he paid seyeral large sums 
for his adherence to the royal cause. His son and heir 
William having died young, Daniel Fleming, brother of 
John, became heir to the estates ; he was a very handsome 
man, and so powerful that he could take up a person of any 
ordinary weight, seated in a chair, and hold him at arm's 
length. He was lieutenant of horse in his majesty's service, 
under the Earl of Newcastle. He was seated at Skirwith 
Hall, where he died, and was buried in the choir of the 
parish church of Kirkland in 1621. 

William Fleming, his son and heir, was bom at Coniston 
Hall in 1609, was educated by his cousin Dr. Daniel Ambrose, 
at St. John's College, Cambridge. He married in 1631 
Alice, eldest daughter of Roger Kirkby, of Kirkby Ireletb, 
Fumess, by whom he had six sons and a daughter. This 
William Fleming, like his uncle John, had to submit to 
heavy penalties for his allegiance to the unfortunate Charles, 
demanded of him by the commissioners of Goldsmiths' Hall. 
He resided sometimes at Skirwith, and sometimes at Rydal, 
but died at his birthplace of Coniston 25th May, 1653. 

Twenty years after this, his eldest son. Sir Daniel Fleming, 
the father of fifteen children, after the death of his wife in 
1650, retired from Coniston, and made Rydal Hall his 


permanent residence. None of the family again resided at 
Coniston, and the old hall, pleasantly situated on the banks 
of the lake which bears its name, was thenceforth deserted. 
Sir Daniel died 15th March, 1701. 

The next in descent was William Fleming, bom at Rydai Hall, July 26thy 
Then Sir George, fifth son of Sir Daniel, who died 2nd July, 1 747, aged 8 1 . 

Then William, only son of Sir George, who left issue one daughter, and 
the inheritance came to — 

Michael, sixth son and tenth child of Sir Daniel, and next his son — 

Sir William Fleming, who at the baptism of his son Michael, restored the 
old orthography, and reassumed the article " Le " prefixed to the name of 
Fleming, which for many generations had been omitted. Sir William died 
in 175^1 And was succeeded by Sir Michael, who was the 23rd in succession 
from Richard le Fleming, second son of the first Sir Michael le Fleming, 
who was the friend of William the Conqueror. And, as before shewn, it was 
another Sir Richard (great grandson of the above Sir Richard le Fleming), 
who married Elizabeth de Urswick, and thus obtained the manor of 

At the commencement of the present nineteenth century, the family of 
Le Fleming counted twelve knights and four baronets. 


Samlesbury is an extensive manor, a short distance south- 
west of Ribchester in Lancashire. The ancient hall was 
formerly moated around, and formed three sides of a large 
quadrangle. The centre hall, which was a noble specimen of 
rude and massive woodwork, was repaired by Sir Thomas 
Southworth in 1532, and at that time dated from the reign 


ci Edward III. Anotiber wing, built oi wood tow^urd^ the 
quadrangle, and of brick outwards (the earliest apeciiK&on oi 
Inickwork in the parish), was of a later date. Thwe was 
about this house a profusion and bulk of oak, that must almost 
have laid prostrate a forest to erect it. The pidiQcipal timbers 
were carved with great elegance, and the compartments of 
the roof painted with figures of saints, while the outsides of 
the building were adorned with profile heads of wood, cut in 
bold relief within huge medallions. It is barely possible that 
this interesting old manor-house may still be preserved, and 
if so, it will be curious to observe how the inner doors have 
neither panel, nor lock, and have always been opened, like 
those in modem cottages, with a latch and a string. It is 
also remarkable that the boards, or rather massive planks, 
which constitute the upper floors, lie parallel with the joists, 
instead of athwart them, as if disdaining their support. In 
this old manor-house lived the family of Southworth, father 
and son, for 350 years. 

The Sir Thomas Southworth, who repaired it, was one of 
the leaders at the battle of Flodden field. He was fifth in 
descent from that Sir John Southworth,* who was one of 
those ten knights who made covenant with Sir Robert 
Urswick, sheriff of Lancashire, each to supply fifty archers 
for the field of Agincourt. Sir John afterwards died of 
dysentery at the siege of Harflem* in 1415. A grandson of 

• John, son of Sir John de Southworth, was a joint-heir with Robert Urswick 
of John Sparrow's estates in Dorset, see above. 


his married a daughter of Sir Richard Molineux, of Sephton ; 
who was therefore the great grandmother of the above-named 
Sir Thomas Southworth. As already stated, the Southworths 
held for a time by inheritance from the Coupland family 
(with whom they were imited) the manor of Uprawcliffe in 
the reign of Edward III. ; which estate similarly passed from 
them to the Ubswicks, and thence to the Earkbys of Earkby, 
and still later to the Westbyes of Mowbrick, who gave the 
name of White Hall to the manor-house which occupied, and 
perhaps still occupies, the site of the old hall of UprawcliflFe. 

This manor of Rawcliffe, Uprawcliffe, or Upper Rawcliffe, on the north 
side of the river Wyre, and about three to four miles below Garstang, was 
in the reign of King John granted to the widow of Theobald Walter, whose 
son Theobald (styled Le Boteles, i>., bottler or butler to the king) held it 
in the reign of Henry III. In the reign of Edward II. it passed to John de 
Coupland and his wife Joan, being tenants of the Duke of Lancaster. This 
John de Coupland was the valiant soldier who at the battle of Durham took 
prisoner David 11. of Scotland, who endeavoured by repeated blows 
(dashing out several of his antagonist's teeth) to provoke him into slayiag 
him ; but Coupland preferred to take his noble prize whole and sound, and 
for this act he was by Edward III. rewarded with ;^5oo per annum until he 
could receive an equivalent in land *' where he himself should choose," 
besides being created a Knight Banneret, and having many other marks of 
royal favour conferred upon him. 

It is not necessary to enter into any further details of the 
ancient family of Cowpland, Coupland, or Copeland. Suffice 
it to say that the Southworths partly inherited of, and partly 
held in conjunction with, the Couplands their estate of 
Uprawcli£Pe, until it passed by marriage from them to the 


.Urswicks, and again from the Urswicks in like manner to 


Ejrkbts of Kibebt Iheleth. 

The marriage by which the Kirkbys obtained the manor 
of Uprawcliffe, is shewn in the Urswick pedigree as between 
John, third son of Richard Kirkby, of Kiiiby, knight, and 
Johanna, eldest daughter of Robert Urswick, of Uprawcliffe 
and Badsworth, son of Robert Urswick, who had the grant, 
or obtained by marriage the possession, of this Uprawcliffe 
estate in the reign of Richard II. or Henry IV. There was 
also a marriage between Helen, sister of Johanna Urswick, 
and Roger, brother of John de Kirkby, which probably led 
to a further transfer of property from the Urswicks to the 

The Kirkbys were an old Fumess family, who, like many 
others, derived their name from their habitation. Kirkby 
signified, as is apparent, the neighbourhood of a church, and 
Ireleth means a western assembly or settlement, as being 
seated, shortly after the Conquest, in Fumess, the most 
western part of the ancient Northumbrian kingdom. The 
first of this line who can be fixed upon with certainty, was 
Roger de Kirkby, who was lord of Kirkby in the time of 
Richard I. He married a daughter of Gilbert, son of Roger 
FitzReinfred, and on that occasion assumed the arms which 
the family afterwards bore, viz., ^^A field argent, two bars 
gules, on a canton gules, a cross moline, or.'' The ujse of the 
cross moline shews an attachment to the Molyneuz family, 

190 B9O5SD0 OF TfflS PAMILT Ot tilltSWlCft. 

either tnm allegiance or alliance. Theere tamft'wtte quar- 
tered with those of Urswick. 

Gilbert FitzReinfred married a daughter of William de 
Lancaster, the sixth baron Of Kendal, and his son and heir, 
in consideration of the vast estates which he inherited frotn 
lus mother, assumed the name and arms of Lancaster. 

Roger de Kirkby had two sons, the younger of whom, 
John, was a famous lawyer in the reign of Henry III. He 
was made judge of the king's bench in 1235, lord keeper of 
the privy seal in 1272, and in the succeeding reign of 
Edward the first, was appointed baron of the exchequer, viz., 
in 1283. He was author of a work much esteemed by anti- 
quaries, viz., an ^^ Inquest for Yorkshire," taken in 1284, and 
which bears his name. His elder brother, Alexander (who 
was heir to the estate), was during the life of his grandfather 
Gilbert FitzReinfred, left with him as an hostage for his 
own son and heir William (who had assumed the name of 
Lancairter by reason of his inheritance), for this William de 
Lancaster had joined the barons in rebellion against the king, 
and been taken prisoner to Rochester Castle in 1215. 

At length, having fulfilled his probation for his uncle 
William's allegiance, Alexander de Eorkby became a great 
benefactor to Fumess Abbey, so soon as he succeeded to the 
lordship of Kirkby by the death of his fatl^r Sir Roger. 
After a descent of five generations from Alexander, during 
"Which iSie Kirkbys formed alliances with the Couplands, 
Gonydrs, Le Flemings, Irebys of Ireby, etc., we find Sir 

»^' > 


Richard de Eirkby a commissioner of musters and array in 
Ihe reign of Richard It. He obtained either by grant or 
purchase an increase to his landed property in the manor of 
^rightington. He had five sons and four daughters.* EGu» 
eldest son^ Richard, married Joan, or Jane, daughter of Sir 
Thomas Tunstall, of Thurland Castle, Lancaster (and had an 
only daughter, who married the first Lord Ogle, of Ogle 
Castle), but dying before his father, his next brother, Roger, 
succeeded to the Kirkby estate. Of the third son we gain 
no record, but the fourth was John, named in the Urswick 
pedigree, as having married Joan, daughter and co-heiress of 
Sir Robert Urswick, of UprawclifEe, and by this marriage 
obtaining the manor of UprawclifEe. Roger, the heir to the 
Kirkby estates, afterwards married Helen, another daughter 
of Sir Robert Urswick ; this double union was probably the 
means of conveying a large portion of the Urswick's heritage 
into the family of Karkby. They were good, generous folk, 
those Urswicks, and loved and cared for their daughters; 
their sons had their good swords, and strong arms to wield 
them, what more did they require ? 

Roger and John de Kirkby became the fathers of a long 
line of Kirkbys of Uprawcliffe, who continued to flourish 
until the reign of Charles I., when the family, by strenuously 
espousing the cause of that unfortunate monarch, were totally 
ruined ; three brothers, the last heirs male, being all slain in 
the king's service. 

• Elizabeth, the eldest, married Hugh de Curwen ; Alice, the decond, married 

Sir William de Houghton. 



The originally resident Kirkbys of Kirkby Ireleth remained there in 
prosperity until the year 1750, when the estate having become much encnm* 
bered, Roger Kirkby, Esq., mortgaged it to a London banker, who was 
agent to Catherine, duchess of Buckingham ; and this gentleman becoming 
insolvent, the manor passed to the duchess in part payment of his delin* 
quencies. She bequeathed it to Constantino Phipps, Lord Mulgrave in 
Ireland, from whom it was purchased in 1771 by the Right Honorable Lord 
John Cavendish, from whom it descended to his nephew the Duke of 

Regarding the family of Westbye of Mobrick or Mowbrick, 
it appears that John Westbye obtained a moiety of the manor 
of Uprawcliffe, so early as the reign of Henry VIII., by his 
wife Ellen Kirkby. His grandson John Westbye won great 
riches and honour in the reign of EUzabeth, in advancing the 
Reformation. The family at that period seem to have been 
rapidly increasing in prosperity ; in Elizabeth's reign and in 
the succeeding ones of James and Charles, their names occur 
in the post-mortem inquisitions as holders of very numerous 
estates in Lancashire and Yorkshire. Among their possessions 
were lands in Urswick ; and it is singular that in the post- 
mortem inquisition of John Westbye, in the third year of the 
reign of James I., viz., 1606, this word Urswick is, in the 
printed volume preserved in the British Museum, twice, viz., 
in index and folio, spelt Urwiok.* 

The Westbyes were originally a Yorkshire family. Gilbert de Westbye 
was sherifif of Lancaster in 1233. We may note a few marriages between 
the Westbyes and other families of the north which occur in these records. 
For example, John Westbye who in 1567 married Margaret, daughter of 

• See Ducatus Lancastriae^ vol. I., fol. *]2y No 8o« 


Andrew Barton, of Smithels, Lancaster, had a second wife, Katherine, 
daughter of Thomas Southworth, of Samlesbury. A Thomas Westbye, of 
Mobrick, married a daaghter of Edward Norris, of Speake ; Allan Westbye^ 
of Loton, married a Katharine Radcliffe ; and Stephen Westbye a daughter 
of Ashton of Middleton. 

In 1 63 1 the Kirkbys are stated to have been sole owners of the township 
of Uprawcliffe, anterior to their downfall by adherence to King Charles, 
and in that year Thomas Westbye purchased from them the hall, afterwards 
called White Hall, and settled it on Major George Westbye, his eldest son, 
by his second wife. Robert Westbye, who died in 1792, held lands in 
Much Urswick. 

Le Scbope, OB Le Scboop, of Bolton, Danbt, Mash^m, 


The early members of this family belong too much to the 
dim past to present much material for history. 

They are described as men of laws and letters, who although 
of Norman, were of somewhat humble origin,* and by their 
talents and ability more than by feats of arms, raised them- 
selves to a position of great influence. 

Robert le Scrope is mentioned by Dugdale as holding three 
knight's fees in the coimty of Gloucester in the 12th of 
Henry III., and in the 24th of the same reign as having free 
warren in East and West Boulton, and in possession of other 
estates in Yorkshire. His son and heir was Henry, whose 
son and heir was William, who was living in the reigns of the 
Ist, 2nd, and 3rd Edwards. 

* Their name does not appear among the great feudatories of the Earls of 


A younger son of this family was Sir G^ofErey le Scrope^ 
who purchased monastic lands at Masham, and thus founded 
the family styled Scrope of Masham. They did not build a 
hall at Mafiham, however, but resided at Little Barton, and 
at Clifton, Thornton Watlass.f Sir Geoffrey died in 1339. 

t Watlass, or "wattle house," house built of wattles. 

He had a son and heir, Geoffrey, who was the lord of 
Masham at the period when the battle of Nazara, or Najara, 
was fought, so we may conclude that it was a daughter of 
this gentleman who was wedded to Sir Walter de Urswtk 
after that young knight had returned from the scene of that 
sanguinary struggle where he rendered such ^^ good service." 
GeofPrey le Scrope, of Masham, had a son, Henry, who died 
in 1391. Henry had a son, Stephen, of Masham, who married 
in 1377 Margaret, daughter of Sir Henry Huntingfield, was 
knight of parliament in 1377 and 1392, and died 25ih 
January, 1405. 

Richard le Scrope, who built Bolton Castle, was Lord High Chancellor 
and keeper of the great seal in the reign of Richard II. He is described 
as *'not having his fellow in his own degree for prudence and integrity in 
the whole realm." An occasion is quoted when a favourite courtier of the 
king having obtained from his majesty a considerable grant, he applied to 
Sir Richard le Scrope to have the royal seal affixed thereto, but Sir Richard 
refused, saying that the duty of his office would not permit him to set the 
seal committed to his keeping by the parliament, to all the king's indiscreet 
grants, until he had acquired a little more knowledge of their nature. This 
Sir Richard had a memorable dispute with a Sir Robert Grosvenor, knight, 
who had assumed the same armorial bearings as himself, or at least with so 
trifling a difference as was insufficient except in cases of consanguinity. 


Four generations in descent from Sir Richard bring us to Sir John le 
Scroop, of Bolton, whom we find adhering to Edward IV. against the 
Lancastrians, also engaged in the Scottish wars of that period, and com- 
manding part of the English army at the siege of Norham Castle. 

A grandson of Sir John, viz., Henry le Scroop, commanded in the rear- 
guard, while his kinsman Lord Scroop of Upsali led the van, at the battle 
of Flodden field. 

These were the lords of Bolton and their descendants; but those of 
Masham came to a sad end in the career of one Sir Henry le Scroop, who, 
although he had gained great respect from the kings Henry the 4th and 5th, 
yet in the latter reign, aided by the Earl of Cambridge and Sir Thomas 
Grey, raised an army, and spreading the report that Richard the 2nd was 
still living, endeavoured to excite the nation into restoring the house of 
York to its ascendancy. It is denied that they had any design against the 
life of Henry the 4th, but this fact did not prevail in their favour, and these 
three noblemen were, as traitors, condemned to the block. 

Radclyffe (or Ratcliffe) of Radclyffe Tower, Ordsal, &c. 

Radclyffe, in the hundred of Salford, was one of the 
possessions conferred upon the restless and ambitious Roger 
de Poictou by the Conqueror ; but being forfeited soon after 
the Doomsday survey, the estate was granted to a Saxon 
family, who took the name of De Radclyffe, and enjoyed the 
privilege of free warren and free chase in the territories of 
the duchy of Lancaster. They held at different periods the 
offices of seneschal (or steward) and minister (or magistrate) 
in the forests of Bowland and Blackburnshire. John 
Radclyffe, of Ordsal, accompanied Edward III, in his French 
wars, and was knighted in 1347. Coeval with him was Sir 
Richard Radclyffe, of Radclyffe Tower, whose daughter 


Elena is named in the Urswick pedigree as married to Sir 
Robert Ubswick. Sir Richard Radclyffe held several estates 
in Clitheroe, was steward of Blackbumshire in the early part 
of the reign of Edward III., was high sheriff of Lancaster in 
1355 and 1358, and justice of the peace by commission dated 
12th July, 1394, viz., three years after his son-in-law. Sir 
Robert Urswick, had held the same office. Besides his 
daughter Elena (who was not the eldest of the family, and 
consequently not an heiress). Sir Richard had four sons, 
William, Christopher, Thomas, and Roger, two of whom 
figure on occasions as justices of the peace. 

This family abound in knights of parliament ; to name a 
few for example, Robert de Radclrffe was summoned to serve 
for the county of Lancaster in the years 1334 and 1338 ; 
Robert and John in 1340 ; William, son of Robert, in 1344, 
1350, and 1360; William, son of Richard, in 1366, and 
Richard (his father) in 1368. Also in company with Robert 
Urswick, Thomas de Radcliffe in 1395, and Randolph in 1397. 

Hornby or De Hornby. 

We have it on record that in the reign of Richard II. 
Margaret* de Hornby gave Sir Robert de Urswick power of 

• This Margaret de Homby was Margaret Nevile, the daughter of Sir Robert 
Nevile, who was heir to the Homby estate. She was the wife of Sir William 
Haryngton, who fell at Agincourt, and was afterwards married to Sir Robert 
Urswick, who fought with his fifty archers, and backed by 450 more, under his 
kinsmen with whom he had covenanted as high sheriff of the county, under the 
banner borne at that fight by Sir William Haryngton. 


attorney to take possession of her estate of Asthorpe in 
Lincolnshire, and that this lady was afterwards married to 
Robert, son and heir of Sir Robert Urswick, of Uprawcliffe. 
But although the Hombys were a family whose importance 
outlived the Reformation, of their early history we do not 
succeed in learning more than that they were at a very 
remote period alienated from their original estate of Hornby 
(which we find held by the Neviles and afterwards by the 
Haryngtons), and became settlers in the Flyde or Fylde 
coimtry, viz. the low level land which lay between Lancaster 
Bay and the mouth of the Ribble. 

Johanna de Hornby was receiver-general of the rents of 
the duchy of Lancaster under John of Gaimt, and the records 
in the duchy office give the seals of the same arms which 
have been ever since borne by their descendants, viz., ^*0r, a 
chevron between three bugle horns, sable." 

William de Hornby was appointed rector of Badsworth 
30th April, 1408. 

Hertpobth op Badsworth. 

Prior to the Conquest, Badsworth belonged to two Saxon 
brothers, Upton and Rogerthorpe, and they being dispossessed, 
it was given to the "Lacies"; from them it passed to the 
Reinvilles. By the marrieige of Eva, daughter of Swein de 
Reinville, with Eudo de Longvilliers, it descended to their 
grandson John de Longvilliers, whose daughter and heiress 
married Geoffrey de Nevile, of Brierley and Hornby. The 


estate remained in the possession of the Neviles until the 
reign of Edward III., when a daughter of that family was 
allied to William Hertf orth, of Whessington, in right of which 
marriage Badsworth became the heritage of the Hertforths 
for four generations, until it passed, as already shewn, by the 
union of Johanna Hertforth with Robert, son of Robert 
UbswicK| of Uprawcliffe, into the hands of the latter, who 
held it conjointly with his brother Thomas; thence it 
descended to Robert Urswick, son of Thomas, and from 
Robert to his daughter, Isabel de Vavasour. 


The pedigree of this family dates from the year 1200. It 
is shewn that a Sir Richard Molineux, of Sephton, had for his 
second wife, Helen, the daughter of Sir Thomas Urswick, of 
Badsworth. This Sir^Richard Molineux was high sheriff in 
1396 ; he was son and heir of Sir William, who was son and 
heir of Sir John Molineux, who was living in the reign of 
Edward III. 

Sephton, or Sefton, the original seat of the family, 
descended to them from their ancestor the Norman William 
de Moulines, who obtained it by a grant from Roger de 
Poictou, the land having previously been held by the Thanes, 
who were the gentry of the Anglo-Saxon race. 

The church at Sephton is a handsome pile, erected in the reign of Henrj 
VIII. by Anthony Molyneux, who was then rector, noted for his good 
preaching and his pious deeds. In the chancel, which is divided from the 
nave by a screen, and contains sixteen stalls of elegant carving, are 


deposited the remains of many of the family, and memorial brasses have 
been affixed of their earlier members. There are also two stone monuments 
of cross-legged knights with triangular shields to indicate their profession 
as templars, and an altar tomb of white marble surrounded by an inscription 
to the memory of one Sir Richard Molineux (probably the son of Sir 
Richard before-named), who distinguished himself at the battle of Agin- 
court, and was consequently knighted by Henry V. This Sir Richard was 
lord of Bradley, Haydike, Warrington, Burton-wood, and Newton-in-the- 
Dale. He died in 1439, and his wife Joan is also memorialized in the 
inscription on the tomb. There are brass effigies of Sir William Molineux * 
and each of his two wives. This was a Sir William who signalized himself 
in three actions against the Scots in the reign of Henry VIII., and at the 
battle of Flodden field he took two banners. The Lancashire archers 
having contributed so much to the victory, the king, under his own seal, 
sent a letter of thanks to Sir William for his share as one of the principal 
leaders of those brave and well-skilled bowmen. This Sir William died in 
1548. There are brasses of his son Sir William, two wives, and thirteen 

On a flat stone is preserved the memory of Caryl, Lord ^olyneux, an 
eminent but unsuccessful royalist in the reign of Charles x. His family 
raised a regiment of foot and another of horse in support of the king, for 
which he was subjected to heavy penalties during the Commonwealth, but 
after the Restoration was advanced to high honours. In the broken painted 
glass of the windows may be seen the names of Molineaux with date 1542, 
Margaret Bulcley, daughter of Sir Richard Molineaux, with date 1543, etc. 

The seat of the present Earls of Sephton is Croxteth Hall. 

Redman, or Redmatne, of Levins, Westmoreland. 

This is a family whose memoirs are more in sympathy 
with those of the Urswicks than perhaps any other, for the 
reason of their social status being somewhat on a par as 
Saxon families of similar callings, who were neither lords 


nor barons, but were frequently knights of parliament. 
They were so much better than the Urswicks, that their 
family history produced a bishop; whereas, although the 
opportunity was presented to Christopher Urswick to attain 
that honour, he declined it. He refused the offer, because 
he had the misfortime to be called to a diocese where 
persecution* of those who shewed reformatory tendencieB 
was rife ; and he was of too loving a disposition to become a 
persecutor, and not sufficiently far-seeing, nor sufficiently 
wise or courageous to become a reformer, and in all probability 
a martyr. He shrank alike from the bait thrown out to him 
by the corrupt rulers of the Church, and from the great and 
glorious opportunity offered him by a Higher Power to assert 
the truth, as it had begun to dawn upon his friend Erasmus. 
We must neither marvel nor complain then, that his name is 
buried in comparative obscurity. 

The name of Redman as associating with that of Urswick 
is interesting not only on account of the relationship which is 
shewn to have existed between them at the time when the 
latter became apparently extinct in the north, but from the ^ 
fact of their names having been linked together in many 
transactions from a very early period. For example, in the 
reign of Henry III, when Elizabeth, daughter of Adam de 
Urswick, being the widow of Sir Richard le Fleming, settled 

• The mart}Tdom of Babram is already mentioned. About 1529 we have 
another example in the fate of Thomas Bilney, who was burned in the Lollard's 
pit, among the hills outside the city of Norwich. Bilney was led to abjure the 
errors of Rome by perusing the writings of Erasmus. 


upon her son John le Fleming her patrimonial estate of 
Kemeford, her brother John Urswick, Matthew de Redman, 
and another, were the witnesses to the deed. 

Again, on the 3rd of October, 1337, when Thomas de 
Urswick was one of the knights and gentlemen who formed 
the retinue of Earl Bohun on an expedition to France, 
Matthew de Redman's name stood next to that of Thomas de 
Urswyk, evidently indicating that they were in company 
together when entered on the list. Again, in the year 1510, 
when Isabel de Vavasour, daughter and heiress of Robert 
Urswick, of Badsworth, in her last will and testament 
endowed and ordained a course of services at the chm*ch of 
Badsworth, to be conducted "for ever" (so soon to be 
annulled, not purified, by the Reformation), which services 
were styled a chantry, the witnesses to the "foundation 
charter " of this same chantry were Christopher Urswick, late 
archdeacon of Richmond, James Haryngton, dean of York 
and rector of Badsworth, Edward Redman, Esq., and two 
others. Christopher Urswick in his will appoints^ his nephew 
William Redman as trustee to carry out certain arrangements 
as to his schools at Lancaster. Also in the post-mortem 
inquisition of Thomas Urswick, who died in the year 1619, it 
is shewn that one of his sisters married a Mr. Redman, and 
that they had a son, James Redman, who was a joint-heir 
with William Bentam of the property left by Thomas Urswick, 
who had died without male issue. 

This old Redman family still maintained a position in the land of their 

172 re:cx>rds of the faiolt of ubswick. 

birth after the dissolution of the monastery of Famess, although there is 
little doubt that they were, like hundreds of other families, greatly 
impoverished by it. At the period of that event (1537) we find William 
and Thomas Redman holding considerable estates in the neighbourhood of 
Fumess; in 1549 William Redman is in litigation with the vicar upon the 
vexed question of tithes, which were such a source of grievance to the 
inhabitants of Fumess alter the Dissolution. In the same year Thomas 
Fell is engaged in a similar dispute with the vicar. This leads us to the 
subject of an old tenement in Much Urswick, called Redmayne, or Redman, 
Hall, which is stated by Baines (the Lancashire historian) to have been 
formerly called *• Urswick Hall." It was occupied (or more probably 
perhaps the house which stood upon the site of the present one, was 
occupied) for nineteen generations by the family of Fell, whose heir Robert 
Geldart held it in 1835. By this we are inclined to suppose that this was 
the home of Thomas Urswick at the time of his death, that it descended to 
the Redmans, and passed from them to the Fells, thence to Robert Geldart, 
Esq., whose niece Mrs. Battersby was but lately, if she is not still, in 

Redmayns or Redmans,* with their corrupted name also of 
Redmond, are now as thick as blackberries in our little 
island, so let us turn to some fragments which we gather of 
their history at that remote time when they formed a more 
distinct and distinguishable family. 

Their original seat was Levins in Westmoreland. Norman 
de Redman obtained the estate from Ketel, son of Uchtred 
in 1188. As their neighbours the Urswicks were within the 
spiritual jurisdiction of Fumess Abbey, so in like manner 
were the Redmans within that of the Abbey of Shap. Henry, 
son of Norman de Redman, seneschal of Kendal, was a 

• Redman, Redeman, or Radman, a "knight-rider." 


witneBS to a grant made by Robert Veteripont to that 
monastery in 1211. Benedict, son and heir of Henry , was a 
hostage for the future fidelity of Gilbert de Lancaster, baron 
of Kendal, to King John, the said Gilbert having for a time 
been in rebellion, as we may conclude; this occurred in 1215. 
This Gilbert de Lancaster, it will be remembered, was the 
son of the Roger FitzReinfred, from whom Gilbert de Urswick 
obtained the manor of Coniston. 

After Benedict, we have Matthew de Redman, seneschal of Kendal, who 
was one of the witnesses to a deed confirming a grant of lands in Preston, 
Holme, and Hutton, which had been made by William de Lancaster, a 
former baron of Kendal, to Patric, son of Thomas, son of Gospatric, and 
also to a similar grant by the same baron of the manor of Skelsmergh to 
Robert de Leybume : both deeds dated 1270 or 1271. 

In the year 1296 Matthew de Redman was witness to a grant of lands in 
Old Hatton and Home Scales by John de Culwen to his brother Patric de 
Culwen. Matthew de Redman was knight of the shire in 1295, 1307, 
and 1 31 3. 

His son Matthew was one of the jurors at the post-mortem inquisition of 
Ingelrum de Gynes in 1323; performed the same office for Robert de 
Cliiford in 1345 ; and was knight of the shire in 1358. 

By the post-mortem inquisition of Joan de Coupland, dated 1376, it is 
shewn that Matthew de Redman held of her by homage, and a service (or 
rent) of two marks yearly, the manors of Levins and Lupton, as of her (or 
as we should say being part of her) manor of Kirkby in Kendal. Also he 
held of her a moiety of a manor called Quinfell and divers tenements in 
Selfat. Also Thomas de Redman, who was one of the jurors on this 
occasion, held of her a tenement situated in Kirkeslack. 

In 1 38 1 Henry Percy, ist Earl of Northumberland and 4th Lord of 
Alnwick, having been constituted one of the commissioners for guarding 
the west marches, and having received command to take special care of the 


castles and garrisons in these parts, transmitted the same charge to Sir 
Matthew Redman, knight, who was his lieutenant in Berwick. And Sir 
Matthew was so overzealous in his duty, and so strict in observing the 
orders of his chief, that on the arrival of John, Duke of Lancaster, from 
Scotland, he was refused admission to Berwick Castle. This so much 
incensed the Duke* against Earl Percy that at a subsequent meeting which 
they had in the presence of the king and some of his nobles at Berk- 
hamsted, sharp words passed between them ; the altercation grew so high 
that the Earl was arrested, but Earls Warwick and Suffolk being present, 
they became surety for his appearance at the next parliament to explain the 
matter, and he was set at liberty, and allowed to depart. 

At the post-mortem inquisition of John Parr, knight, in 1407, John de 
Redman was one of the jurors ; and at that of Ingelram de Courcy in 141 1 
James de Redman was in the same capacity. Richard de Redman married 
Margaret, daughter of Thomas Middleton, of Middleton Hall, esquire, and 
was knight of the shire in 1441. 

By an inquisition held in 1483, it was shewn that the manor of Levins 
was held of William Parr, as part of the barony of Kendal, by Edward 
Redman, aged 27, being heir in the place of his elder brother William, 
deceased without issue ; and that the said William and Edward were the 
sons of Richard, son of Matthew, son of Matthew, son of Richard de 
Redman. This is only interesting as evidence of the careful preservation 
of the entail in those times. This Edward Redman was living in the reign 
of Henry VIL, and in 1488 Thomas Haryngton (a cousin of Sir James and 
Robert Haryngton, who were attainted after the battle of Bosworth) held of 
him a messuage ancf tenement in Lupton. He, Edward Redman, was the 
last of the line of the Redmans or Redmaynes of Levens ; the estate was 
sold, but the family had produced one who became a noted ecclesiastic in 
the person of Richard Redman, D.D., bishop of St. Asaph in 1468, and 
abbot of Shap in 1471. He was entangled in the affair of Lambert Simnel, 

• John of Gaunt; tyrannical and overbearing, no doubt, but he had a large heart 
and keen intellect. He was a patron of Chaucer, and a supporter of Wycliffe. 



but acquitted himself; was promoted to the see of Exeter in 1495, and 
translated to that of Ely in 1501, where he died in 1505. There is a 
sumptuous monument to his memory in Ely cathedral. 

More voluminous records of this family may be found in Sir George 
Ffloyd Duckett's " Harwood Evidences/* He mentions a Walter Redman, 
D.D., bom in 1425, rector of All Saints, Norwich, who died in 1508. Also 
a John Redman, D.D., first master of Trinity College, Cambridge, who 
assisted in compiling the prayer-book of Edward VI. in 1549, and died at 
the age of 52, in 155 1. And again a William Redman, bishop of Norwich 
in 1594. The decay of fortune in this family about that period may be 
attributed to the same cause as that of many more, viz., the decay of power 
among the tenants-in-chief of whom they were tenants-in-fee. 

Vavasor, or Vavasour, of Wilutoft, Spaldington, 


This family derived their name from ^^ Le Valvasor,'* which 
was an office held under the king little inferior to that of a 
baron. It was remarked that in twenty-one descents from 
Sir Mauger le Valvasor in the time of William I., not one of 
them had ever " married an heiress, or buried their wives," 
implying of course that they won their estates by their own 
warlike qualifications, and mostly fell on the battlefield. 

Two alliances between the families of Vavasor and Urswick 
have been already mentioned, viz., one in the 14th and 
another in the 15th century. The former between Sir Henry 
Urswick, knight, and Anne, daughter of Sir Robert Vavasour 
and his wife Constance de Mowbray ; the latter between Sir 
William Vavasour, of Bubwith, and Isabel, daughter of Sir 
Robert Urswick and his wife Katherine Haryngton. With 


regard to the former, Sir Robert Vavasour was knight of 
parliament in 1313; was engaged in several of the Scottish 
wars of that period, in one of which he lost his life. 

It would appear that his brother Sir Henry Vavasour 
married his widow Constance, and had issue, two sons;— 
perhaps by a special dispensation from the Pope, or perhaps 
this would be unnecessary, let the learned decide. 

It is recorded that a Sir William Vavasour, who died in 
1312, held a messuage and 80 acres of land in Badsworth. 
Connecting this with the marriage above named, we cannot 
but imagine that the Urswicks were associated with the 
manor of Badsworth for a much longer time, and in many 
more ways, than is accounted for in the possession (through 
the medium of the Southworths) of the brothers Robert and 
Thomas, and afterwards of Robert, son of Thomas Urswick. 

Referring to the later union of Sir William Vavasour of 
Bubwith, and Isabel Urswick, of Badsworth, we have another 
reason* for supposing that the records gathered as to the 
various periodical disposals of the Badsworth estates must be 
very meagre, a mere sample of many scores of others perhaps 
cherished in monastic archives, and sharing the common fate 
of such documents at the Dissolution. 

• Namely, in the. letter of Christopher Urswick to Lord Darcy, where he speaks of 
his manor of Badsworth. The manor of Bubwith, seat of Sir WiUiam Vavasour, 
was one of six, viz., Bubwith, Foggathorpe, Gribthorpe, Willitoft, Harlthorpe, 
and Spaldington, which have long been gathered into one parish, bearing the 
name of Bubwith, and situated in the Holmebeacon division of the Wapentake 
(or hundred) of Harthill. 


• The Vavasors had an original estate at Hazlewood earKer 
than any above mentioned. Their settlement at Spaldington 
took place in the reign of Edward I. 

They were (as is apparent) one of the most influential 
families of the north, had goodly estates in Lincolnshire^ as 
well as Yorkshire. Their family history is too vast to be 
here entertained, so calling to mind the fact that a daughter 
of this family, viz., Msiry, daughter of Thomas Vavasour, of 
Spaldington, esquire, was the wife of Sir Ralph Assheton, of 
Middleton, baronet, in the 17th century, we pass on to those 
(at one time) most powerful and wealthy allies and kinsfolk 
of the Urswicks, — whom, if they led them into anarchy and 
rebellion, we will by no means pronounce to have been 
desirable kinsmen, although no doubt at that period the 
Urswicks were sufficiently proud of them, — viz.. 

The Haryngtons of Havebyngton, in Cumberland, 

afterwards known as the Haryngtons of Aldingham, Gleaston 
Castle,* Tatham Farleton, Witherslack Hall, Amside-tower, 
Brierley, Hornby, Badsworth, etc. 

These Haryngton records, being more scattered and 
voluminous than those of other families connected with the 
subject in hand, may be more conveniently set forth by a few 
abbreviated pedigrees, to show the connexion of Haryngton 
with those of Nevile, Le Fleming, Bonvile, Gray, &c., adding 
in the form of a key to the same a few remarks on the salient 

* The Le Flemings built Gleaston Castle, and it passed to the Haryngtons 

with the manor of Aldingham. 



pcnntB of historical interest whidx some of their meiBben 
present. Several of their wires, althoTig^ ladies of diitisr 
goished birth, will probably, for the sake of breyiiy, he 
omitted^ and may, their fair and honored shades pardon the 

Fbagmsnt of Pedig&bs of Nsvilb or Neyills of Ho&nbt. 

Jobn de Ixmi^Tillen, Eiobo«tor, 89 Htn. IIL 

Bis ton, Jobn de IjODgTi]len» had a dao^ter and boxMB, 

Uazgartts who was the wife of Geoibej de Keyile ; thej had ■ooe, 

John Nerile, and BbbeitlleTile. 

heir to tha Heml^ eitele. | 

LBohert, hie eon. / 

eon t 

(heir of hie ffraa^niother Meigazet), Sir fioberi, nil grandeon, 

died wiUvoat leeae* heir to the Homfay eafcate ; had 

one eon md two danghtere, ^., 

T 1 ' r 

Sir Thomae NeTile. HenaNl^ end. Joan, 

died before hie father ; )ufi a the wife of Sir wife of John 

dan|iiter. Haxgazet (who WlUioM Smytigtm^ de Ijengton. 

rae wife of Thomae Beaufort, Xkifht Baitmnt 

Duke of Bzeter), bat no at the battle ol 

wae wife of Thomee Beanf drt, Xnifht Batm$ni 

' e of Bzeter), bat no at the battle 

enrflTing eene. A^^noonrt. 

Fraombnt of PiDiORXB OF Ls Flsmimg OF Aldinghah, 
in connexion with Haryngton and Bonvile. 

Michael le Fleming, of Aldingham, drowned in. Leven Water, being the 
fourth or fifth in descent from the first Sir Michael le Flemings had a titter, 
Alice, wife of Richard le Cancefield, who thus obtained the manor of 
Aldingham. Richard and Alice had sont, but they died without issue ; and 
a daughter, Agnes, brought the estate to her husband Sir Robert de 
Haryngton. This Sir Robert had a son, John, who died in the year i347. 
John had a son, Robert, who died before his father, but had a son and heir, 
John, who died on the 7th of June, 1363; a younger brother of his was Sir 
Nicholas Haryngton, of Farleton. 



shewing the coxmezion with Boimle, &c. 

Sir John HaiTiigton Sir ineholasHarTngton, 

(elder hrother of Sir inoholM), of F&rleton, Kent, -wnB the 

m^Ried the daughter of Sir ft^ther of Sir William Hftrjugton, 
Walter BerminAhfun, and died Snight Banneret, alain at 

in 1363 ; had a son, Aginoonrt. 

' 1 

Sir fiobert Haryngton, knighted by Bich. II. ,2377, 

' vt of Si 

led Isabel, davghter of Sir Nigel Lorinfr, K.a. 
died in 1406, sged 42 ; had two eons, vu., 

_J . 

Sir John, Lord HaiTngton, and William Haryngton, of Aldingham, 

who was with Henry V. in his afterwards Lord of Haryngton, 

. French wan, and died without he married Kathezine, daujmter of 

issue in the year 1418. Hugh Oourtney, Earl of Devon, 

uid had an only daughter, 

Elinbeth Haryngton. 

Elizabeth Haryngton was the wife of Sir William Bonvile, 
who was the son of Sir William Bonvile, of Chuton, Devon,* 
and grandson of Sir John Bonvile, of Chuton. 

This Sir WUKam, who married Elizabeth Haryngton, had 
a son, also Sir William, who married a daughter of Sir Richafd 
Nevile, and had a daughter, Cecily. This CecUy de Bonvile 
(lady of Haryngton, by the marriage of her grandfather to 
Elizabeth Haryngton) was ten years of age when her great 
grandfather fell a victim to the vengeance of Margaret of 
Anjou, queen of Henry the 6th. Her father and grandfather 
were then both dead, — ^the latter had died in the previous 
year of 1460, and the former had perished on the field of the 
battle of Wakefield, fought in the same year. The old great 
grandsire, who had been knighted by Henry the 5th in 1417, 

* Or Somerset. He was in the battle of Bernard's Heath, near St. Albans. 


was high sheriff of Devon in 1422, and had served Henry 
the 6th in his French wars for the whole year of 1442, with 
20 men-at-arms and 600 archers; he was knight of parlia- 
ment in 1449, and was by his sovereign constituted for life 
the governor of Exeter Castle in 1452, yet in 1460 at the 
battle of Northampton he was forsworn, having transferred his 
allegiance to the house of York, and being then triumphant, 
had the custody of the captive king's person. It would seem 
that in spite of all this seeming treachery on his part, there 
was a friendly understanding between the king and him; 
which, however, proved of no avail, when he at length 
fell into the hands of the queen, and he then reaped the 
bitter fruits of his seeming disloyalty and ingratitude by an 
ignominious death. 

Cecily de Bonvile, heiress (when of age) to the lordship of 
Haryngton, was twice married : first to Thomas Grey, created 
Marquis of Dorset by his father-in-law King Edward the 4th. 
It will be remembered that Cecily, Marchioness of Dorset 
and Lady of Haryngton, is mentioned in the post-mortem 
inquisition of Thomas Urswick, dated 1519, as possessing 
lands in Trinkeld, Ulverston, Urswyk, Stainton, &c., which 
the said Thomas held of her by rent and fealty, and of her 
second husband Lord Henry. 

By her first marriage with Thomas Grey, Cecily had a son, Thomas, who 
became Marquis of Dorset at his father's death in 1494; himself dying in 
1530, he left two sons, Thomas and Henry. Henry was created Dnke of 
Suffolk by Edward the 6th. That king granted him and his family the 
dissolved^ priory in the Minories as a residence. Henry was beheaded for 


high treason against Queen Mary on the 17th of February, i554f scarcely a 
week having elapsed since his hapless daughter Lady Jane and her husband 
Lord Guilford Dudley had fallen victims to the duke's ambition. Henry's 
brother Thomas Grey shared the same fate on the 27th of April following. 
The head of the duke, embalmed, was long preserved by his family ; when 
the priory was destroyed by fire, it appears to have been forgotten or over- 
looked, and was discovered in a cellar, covered with sawdust, in which the 
hair came off. This grim relic may still be seen at the Trinity Church, 
which occupies the site of the chapel belonging to the ancient priory. The 
features must have been bold and handsome, but the shape of the head is 
far from intellectual. 

Lady Cecily's second husband was Lord Henry Stafford^ a 
younger son of Henry, Duke of Buckingham, and created 
Earl of Wiltshire by Henry the 8th in the first year of his 
reign. By this marriage there was no issue ; Cecily died in 
1523, and the earldom became vacant. This lady was one of 
the receivers of the king's rents for the county of Salop. 

An abridged pedigree of the Haryngtons of Hornby and Brierley, 
descendants of Nicholas Al Haryngton, of Farleton, Kent, and also of 
Chorley ; and of one other branch similarly descended, viz., respectively 
from his sons James and William. 

Sir James A0 and Sir William B EaryngUm {of FarUUm and 

I Ckorley) , Knight'Bannerei mt Affmcourt. 



Nicliolas and James. 

James m. Haryngton, 
gentleman, clerk of the 
bakehouse to Henry YIII. 
m the year 1621. 


2 dau., 




Sir Thomas O Haxyn^ton of Hornby 
and Brieney. 


James.Se Bobert.f 

1 son, James J 
John,! and 

&c. Jane. 



Joan,g Catherine,h 
wife of wife of 
Sir John Bobert 
Sayile. Urswick 
of Baddworth. 

Sir Nicholas Haryngton, of Farleton, &c., had other sons besides James 
and William, so also had Sir William other sons besides Thomas of Hornby, 


6cc., but the object here is to confine owaelves exdtauvtiy to the heiit of 
tbe Hornby estate, which line is shewn so fitr as kuiaty goes to be 
afpannify extinct ; — ^the line descending from Sir James, brother of Sir 
William, being merely touched npon in reference to the dignities obtained 
by descendants of that branch who survived the tronbles which the Camily 
brought upon themselves by their political tendencies. 

We will now consider in detail the different members of this family^ and 
the scraps of history which we obtain concerning them. 

Ket to the Pbdigbee of Habtkgton of Hobkbt. 

(ai) Of Sir Nicholas Harysgtoni of Farleton, we have 
nought of interest to relate, and his brother John having 
abeadj been spoken of, we will pass on to his son, 

(▲8) Sir James Haryngton ; and as, at different periods^ 
we have four members of the family similarly named, care is 
necessary to avoid confusing them. This first-mentioned Sir 
James was the knight who married Helen, daughter of Sir 
Thomas Urswick, of Uprawcliffe and Badsworth, about the 
year 1406, and by that xmion obtained lands in Quassington 
and 'Bermingham, and a moiety of the Badsworth property 
which had come to the Urswicks from the Hertforths. His 
brother, viz., 

(b) Sir William Haryngton, knight of the noble order of 
the Garter, and ^^ knight banneret'' or standard bearer at the 
battle of Agincourt, where he fought and fell, married 
Margaret, daughter and heiress of Sir Robert Nevile, of 
Hornby. She was otherwise called Margaret of (or de) 
Hornby, and as we learn that Robert de Urswick, sheriff of 


Lancaster, led fifty archers (and covenanted with nine other 
leaders for 450 more) at the same memorable battle, and as 
we have it on record that he married Margaret de Hombj, 
we naturally arrive at the conclusion that Robert Urswick 
was a combatant under the banner of Sir William Haryngton, 
and that he eventually married Sir William's widow. A very 
pretty story might be woven out of this incident by a 
romantic genius, but the object of these records is to develop 
truths which have been obscured through neglect, and not to 
adorn them with fiction. 

It was this Sir William Haryngton who, with his lady 
Margaret, presented the monastery of Furness with a hand- 
some and fine-toned bell, which after the Dissolution was 
transferred to the church of Urswick, where it may still be 
seen. Sir William's youngest sister Mary married a Mr. 
John Redman, or Redmayn, — another instance of the coterie 
formed by this group of old Lancashire families. Sir 
William's son, viz., 

(o) Sir Thomas* Haryngton, of Brierley and Hornby, who 
married Elizabeth,! daughter of Sir Dacres, and had by her 
three sons and two daughters, was 60 years of age when the 

• Sir Thomas Haryngton was at the battle of Bloreheath, when the Yorkists 
prevailed ; and on finding themselves deserted by their field-marshal Trollop, he 
and the Duke of York fled to Calais. They were, with two of the Neviles, 
attainted, but landed at Dover on the 2nd July, 1460, and on the loth of the same 
won the battle of Northampton. 

t Elizabeth Dacres, a ward of his father Sir Vi^liam. Sir Thomas Urswick, of 
Mark's Hall, &c., had a daughter who married a connexion of this the Dacres 


battle of Wakefield was fought on the 29th of December, 
1460. Sir Thomas was not slain on the field, but he succumbed 
to the combined effects of his wounds, his age, the inclemency 
of the season^ and grief for the loss of his eldest son, who fell 
by his side on that day, and the old man died on the day 
following. His eldest son, viz., 

(d) Sir John Haryngton, who was killed, left a widow 
Maud, daughter of Thomas, Lord Clifford ; Sir John also left, 
by his wife Maud,, two daughters, Anne(k) and Elizabeth (i), 
aged four and five years. Their mother Maud was soon 
again married to Edmund Dudley ; and for the present we 
pass to the second son of Sir Thomas, viz., 

(Be) Sir James Haryngton ; but as there are many details 
connected with this gentleman's career which possess a 
greater amount of interest than any other of his name, let us 
reserve these until we have finished the minor points in their 
pedigree ; merely shewing that his wife was Joan, daughter 
and heiress of Sir John Nevile, of Oversley, being, when Sir 
James married her, the widow of Sir William Ghtscoign ; and 
that they had a son, John ( i ). 

( f ) Sir Robert Haryngton, who married Isabel, daughter 
of William Balderston, esquire (a co-heiress with one Lady 
Wortley), and had by her one son, James (j),* dean of York, 
and rector of Badsworth.f With regard to the two sisters 

• James Haryngton, dean of York, &c., one of the witnesses to the foundation 
charter of Isabel (de Urswick) Vavasour. 

t Also a daughter, Jane, who married Edmund Talbot, of Bashall, and had one 
only child, Thomas, who died at the age of 13. 


(viz., the fourth and fifth of the family of Sir Thomas 
Haiyngton), Joan and Catherine, the former married Sir 
John Savile, and had three daughters, Mary, Anne, and 
Agnes. , The latter (Catherine) married, as already stated, 
Sir Robert Urswick, of Badsworth. 

On the death of Sir John, as narrated, his two children, Anne (k) and 
Elizabeth (1), were placed under the guardianship of their uncle Sir James* 
A bitter rancour and jealousy existed between the Haiyngtons and the 
house of Stanley ; and actuated by this feeling, and suspicion lest the latter 
should obtain an influence over his nieces, and by such means a power to 
dispose of their property of which he was trustee. Sir James appears to 
have exercised too strict a surveillance over the young people, at which, as 
years advanced, they rebelled ; and having by means of a secret and friendly 
agent succeeded in conveying a message to the king, complaining that their 
uncle kept them '* prisoners," they were eventually by royal command 
removed from his guardianship, and placed under that of Sir Thomas, Lord 
Stanley, who, it will be remembered, was the stepfather of Henry, Earl of 
Richmond, afterwards king. This movement must have greatly increased 
the enmity between the families. The result, so far as it affected the young 
ladies, was, that the eldest was married to Sir Thomas's younger son, Edward 
Stanley (afterwards Lord Monteagle), and Elizabeth to his nephew, John 
Stanley, of Houford. Anne died childless on the 5th of August, 1488. Her 
sister Elizabeth became a widow, and was afterwards married to Richard 
Beaumont, of Whitley. It has been mentioned that Sir James had a son, 
John(i). This John, it is said, died at Temple Bar in 15 10, and it was 
darkly hinted that he met his death by poison from the hand of a servant of 
Sir Edward Stanley's. This may have been an unmerited aspersion, set 
afloat by family hatred ; but it is a fact that Elizabeth, in a letter to her 
husband, Richard Beaumont, did endeavour to cast a suspicion upon her 
brother-in-law, Sir Edward, of having been implicated in the crime. Sir 
Edward Stanley was a materialist, as well as a philosopher, and a man of 


deep design, but this accusation was not proven ; therefore let us believe 
that it was without foundation. In course of time when the vast propotj 
of the Harjmgtons had been confiscated by their disaffection to the house 
of Lancaster, nearly all their estates passed by grants and various means to 
Sir Edward Stanley, but he seems having gained his ends, to have extended 
the right hand of fellowship to his kinsfolk, and by interceding with royalty 
in their behalf, to have gained for them some valuable appointments, as by 
way of example, when in 151 1 in the month of November, another John 
Haryngton was made sheriff of Rutland, and again in 1521 when James 
Haryngton, gentleman, on account of his illustrious descent from Sir 
Nicholas Haryngton, was made '* dark of the bakehouse ** by Henry VIII. 

It is not in these, or many other members of that family 
who thus had crumbs of dignity thrown to them when they 
had ceased to be lords and barons, for these Haiyngtons 
were also styled barons of Egremont, from their having held 
a third part of that manor from the reign of Richard II. to 
that of Henry VI. ; it is not in these that we are more 
particularly interested, but in the supposed movements of 
him, who being the richest and most powerful of his family, 
and the most determined Yorkist of them all, deeming from 
past experience that *^all was lost now," and that his head 
would not be safe upon his shoulders, fled from the lost field 
of Bosworth plain, and is said never to have been heard of 
more. He was great nephew to the Sir James Haryngton, 
who '^ married [circ. 1406] a daughter and heir of Urswick,"* 
and there is little doubt that he was the same Sir James 
Haryngton who aided the Talbots to take prisoner the 
deposed King Henry VI. at Waddington Hall some twenty 

• Harleian Visitation of Cheshire, 1580, p. 140. 


years previously, 00 thai he had little reason to expect favour 
horn the triumphant house of Lancaster. Both he and his 
brother Robert were in arms for King Richard, and though 
few will sympathize with the misfortunes of those who would 
fight for such a monarch, we must bear in mind that gentle- 
men of the north did not believe half the stories that were 
told about him ; also that this Buke of Gloucester was a very 
brave general, that he was the reigning representative of the 
house of York, and that they hated the Earl of Richmond 
"like poison." Robert did not, like his brother, take to 
flght ; but his goods were confiscated, and although a partial 
reversion of the attainder was made in favour of his son 
James^ it was then too late to be of any service to him, as by 
the kindness of Sir Edward Stanley he had been made dean 
of York (1507), and also appointed to the rectory of Bads* 
worth, the living being then in Sir Edward's patronage. 
James held the deanery, as well as the rectory of Badsworth, 
untQ his death in 1512, when be was succeeded by Wolsey. 
James seems to have been quite as fortunate as he deserved, 
for so strongly was he imbued with the family partisanship^ 
that although his father was at that time lying under 
attainder, he made in the year 1487, in company with the 
Earl of Lincoln, an expiring effort to restore the Yorkist 
party to power, by joining the expedition headed by the 
German Colonel Schwartz in aid of the foolish pretensions of 
Lambert Simnel, prompted by the Duchess of Burgundy, 
For this he was attainted, as his father and uncle before him 



had been ; but bis acts of rebellion had in the year 1504 been 
quite overlooked and pardoned^ for it was at that period that 
the reversion above named was made in his favour. 


Sittikmtxt joff tljt 9arsnjgit0ns wxh }Six%ixntla in ^Ijto^filgm. 

|HE northern historians, Baines, Hunter, and Whitaker 
teU how, when the field was lost at Bosworth, August 
22nd, 1485, Sir James Haryngton took to flight at 
the request of the dying monarch, and was heard of no more. 
One says that he mounted his good horse, and fled at the 
suggestion of the king, another that, joined by his wife, he 
probably fled to the court of Burgundy, and a third that he 
died in extreme poverty. Now, as all these are merely 
conjectures, we have a perfect right to form our own, and 
they are that Sir James, happy in all his troubles, being 
joined by his faithful wife, did not fly to the Duchess of 
Burgundy for refuge, but sought it in a more congenial 
atmosphere within his own country, yet so far within the 



•T><^«^p^-^*Bfv fpi ■■ wm^^ 


bounds of his Welsh neighbours as to feel safe if any urgent 
enquiries should be made. Perhaps he had no cause for fear, 
and might have remained in his own land, and amongst his 
own kindred in perfect safety, so far as his life was con- 
cerned, but the confiscation of his property was inevitable, 
and he was of far too bold and independent a spirit to be a 
witness to his own degradation. 

Twenty years after these events, viz., in 1505, an inquisition 
was taken of this attainder and conviction of Sir James 
Haryngton, and it was shewn that he had been possessed of 
the manors of Brierley, Shafton, and half of that of Hems- 
worth, of lands in South Hindelay, Culthome, Peniston, the 
patronage and advowson of Bretton, the churches of Bads- 
worth and Hemsworth, and a chantry in the church of 
Doncaster. The family had long and obstinately contested 
their right to Hornby, on the grounds that Sir James had 
been tenant-in-fee thereof, but Sir Edward Stanley settled 
that matter by obtaining a grant of it from the king. 

We rarely find the Urswicks mentioned, except when 
engaged in some official capacity, viz., as magistrates, sheriffs, 
or members of parliament. Their constant participation 
(which being trained to war from their youth, was inevitable) 
in the scenes of conflict, being neither nobles nor barons, but 
knights of the lesser order, or knight bachelors, as they were 
caUed, these military duties would pass imnoticed with 
himdreds of others; they were, like a great multitude of 
their fellow-combatants, included in the general summary: 


^^ besides many other knights and gentlemen," a clause so 
frequently occurring in the descriptions of the ^^ Wars of the 

Again, taking into considwation the close alliance and 
mutual dealings of the Urswix^ks with the Haryngtons, we 
cannot entertain much doubt as to which way the greater 
part of them would lean,— so long as the house of York had 
any hopes of ascendancy. 

And turning once more to the subject of the post-mortem 
inquisition of Thomas Ubswtk in 1519, we find a mysterious 
absence of any mention of the name of the teAher of the said 
Thomas ; we learn that his mother was still living, and held 
lands in dower for the term of her life, and we also learn 
that his grandfather was named John, and that his father's 
brother was Christopher Urswyk, clerk, who was heir of 
his father, brother, and nephew, all of whom he survived. 
We shall conclude that the father of Thomas was, being an 
elder brother, also named John after his father; and this 
John was between 40 and 50 years old, if living, when the 
battle of Bosworth was fought. Upon this combination of 
circumstances and those which follow, we infer that John 
(son of late John), father of Thomas, had another older son 
named after him, and who was with him at the said battle 
fighting on the side of the Yorkists ; that John, senior, was 
either killed on the field, or died shortly after, or in some 
way was prevented from returning to his wife, or being 
joined by her ; and was therefore reckoned among the slain. 


That young. Jolm, cbceadiBg to return home from the lost 
battle^ aud thuB bring trouble upon his family , fled with Sir 
James Haryngton, and perhaps maiiy more, and was also 
supposed to have been slain. 

It is easy to picture a little, band o£ : fugitives^ haviug by 
I»reYious consultation resolved iig^ii such , a course in th9 
event of defeat, scouring the track towards Atherstoue ; there 
they would comet upou the old Boman or Watling Street, 
yet undestroyed, and not only available^ but extremely 
well adapted for the purposea o| their flight, as from its 
almost perfect straightness, they could view either friend or 
foe for a great distance in front, or rear; this old road 
ceming direct from London by St; Albans, Duustable, Stony 
Stratford, Northampton, and Daventry, and after passing 
Atherstone, taking only one bend to the left or more southerly 
dxrection about Tamworth, would take our little band via 
Litchfield and Sbi£EnaU to the junction at Wroxeter, the old 
^^Uriconium" of the Romans, with the other Wailing Street, 
running north to Chester, aud south to the Bristol GhanneL 
Taking the latter route, for they had had enough of the 
north, they now find themselves within the Welsh marches ; 
and feeling tolerably secure, they proceed more leisurely, and 
gaze upon the glorious, scenery, the thickly-wooded hills, and 
fertile valleys of that country, which they have oft before 
looked upon with longing eyes, and determined in their 
hearts that should adverse fate overthrow the dynasty of the 
house they loved, they would here seek a home as simple 


yeomen y fell timber with their battle-azefi, cut down the 
brushwood with their old swords, and wing their arrows at 
pheasants, partridges, and hares, instead of foes. On their 
route to Bloreheath, either they or their fathers some six and 
twenty years since had, no doubt, explored some portion of 
that land of beauty. Some two years later than the fight of 
Bloreheath, near Shrewsbury, that of Mortimer's Cross, near 
Ludlow, must have compelled many members of their 
families to traverse this very road, and survey these very 
glades rich with grasses, streams abounding with fish, such as 
their old monastic ponds of Fumess could hardly boast, hills 
that might prove fastnesses to them if required, as they had 
been to Caractacus of old. But these pictures, though not 
overdrawn, are somewhat departing from the matter-of-fact 
details which it is our duty to deal with. 

It is from the ^^ Lay Subsidies," or taxes collected, in the 
hundred of Mounslowe, or Munslow, Salop (which are written 
on long strips of parchment, four to six inches wide, and 
varying in length, bound together with small thongs and wax, 
and preserved in the Record Office, Fetter Lane, London), 
that we gather further tidings of our friends Haryngton and 
Urswick. These strips of parchment are called '^ membranes," 
and are bound together in various quantities from a very few 
up to as many as eighty in a bimdle, and closely written, 
often on both sides, with the names of every tenant of every 
grade and in every village, the rate at which his lands or 
goods, as the case might be, were valued, and the amount of 


his tax, or subsidy, of so many pence in the pound, according 
to the levy. 

This over-careful system of entering the names of each 
tenant, and for which purpose a collector had to be selected 
and employed in each small circuit, does not appear to have 
been adopted until the 15th year of the reign of Henry VIII., 
viz., 1523, or thereabouts, and the custom ceased on the 
accession of Charles II.; after which, as at the times previous 
to its adoption, simply the rates of assessment and the 
amounts levied in each district, village, or parish, were 
entered, and no further care was taken as to particularising 
each ratepayer. It was probably a kind of inquisitorial 
process instituted to prevent any of the king^s subjects from 
evading their contributions or dues to the crown, which might 
be attempted in remote districts except when under strict 
surveillance. These curious old documents are written in the 
quaint manuscript or court hand of the periods, and as these 
often differ somewhat in their styled construction, they are 
occasionally very difficult to decipher, and one is very glad 
to avail oneself of the kind assistance of those courteous 
gentlemen who preside over the literary department in those 
musty and dusty archives. With regard to the identity of 
the names of Urswyk and Urwyk, the superintendent of that 
office remarked, '* If you know anything about the etymology 
of names, you cannot entertain a doubt." 

To commence then with the first of these entries for the 
county of Salop in the 15th year of the reign of Henry VIII.* 

• Record Office, Lay Subsidy 166—127, 15 Hen. VIII. 



and tumiug to the collections in the hundred of Mnnslowe, 
we find under the head of " Ffelhampton " (which evidently 
here includes a wider circuit embi-acing the Marsh and other 
adjoining small villages or hamlets) among other tenantry a 
name which looks like John "Uvrwyk." Now this collector's 
work is throughout a rather illegible one, so we are not 
surprised that John Urwyke, as he chose then to call himself, 
and giving the Yorkshire broad dialect to his initial, pro- 
nouncing his nanie^ John Orwyk,* should have had his name 
thus entered. 

Twenty years later we find a great improvement, and the 
name clearly and legibly rendered as Urwyke. But we have 
not yet concluded with the first entry, nor completed the 
subject which leads us to it in the matter of the Roman road 
aforesaid. In its southern route from Wroxeter, near 
Shrewsbury, it passes through the estate of Felhampton, 
formerly a vill, or hamlet, which is described by the late 
Rev. W. Eyton as having been disforested by an act of 
perambulation in the reign of Edward the 1st, viz., on the 6th 
of June, 1300, which act was ratified in the following year. 
The lord of the manor at that period, and somewhat 
subsequently, appears to have been one John Stepleton, who 
held that and the adjoining estates of Marsh, Afcot (or 
Affechot), Streford, etc., in villeinage, that is, for certain 

* The name was phonetically spelt in the north on some occasions, — Orswick 
or Worswick, and the peasantry of Lancashire in the present day call the village 
of Urswick, OssiCK. 


services rendered to John FitzAlan, son of FitzAlan, a 
benefactor of Lilleshall Abbey, to the abbots of which these 
lands belonged, prior to the Dissolution. This John de 
Stepleton, we are told, did no suit either to county or 
hundred, and paid neither stretward nor motfee, which we 
may construe as something similar to road rate and land tax, 
and may form a conjecture that he had an " easy time of it "; 
and as indicating that the feudal laws in those parts were not 
very stringent, we may see a very good reason for many 
families seeking a home and a refuge there when driven from 
the birthplace of their ancestors by the confiscations resulting 
from their adherence to the cause of a faded faction. We 
have no means of ascertaining whether these lands were still 
in the holding of this same family of Stepleton at the period 
to which we are alluding, or who was then lord of the soil ; 
but the old manorial residence was most probably then still 
existing, of which no reminiscence now remains but the field 
which occupies its site, and which still bears the name of 
Q-rittles or Gritthalls, being a corruption of Greathall. 
Subsequently, when the feudal system had faded out, and 
that of free tenantry taken its place, a farm-house was 
erected, with the customary butbuildings. The house has 
long since disappeared, but the buildings remain, and are 
utilised, in addition to the newer ones contiguous to the 
modem and by no means picturesque residence of Fel- 
hampton Court. 

At the time the subsidy here in question was made, John 


Urswyke, or Urwyke, made one of several tenants apparently 
of Felhampton : not a freeholder, as we naturally conjecture 
from the fact of his being rated in the value of goods, and 
not of lands. The amount of his valuation wbs £2, and he 
was taxed at the rate of sixpence in the pound, — ^that is, he 
paid a subsidy of one shilling. He probably held about 200 
acres, and his position in taking up a grant in that thicklj- 
wooded country may have been very similar to that of the 
modem Canadian settler, who obtains land free on the 
condition that he builds a house, and clears and cultivates a 
certain portion of land within a stated period, 

Lying contiguous to Felhampton on the north-east side ia 
Alcaston, where in this same subsidy of 1523 we find, a close 
neighbour of John Urwtke, the name of Richard Haryngton. 
It is an isolated instance of that name either in the hundred 
of Munslow or the surrounding country; you may search the 
closely-written columns of those parchments, and not find it 
again recurring. This Richard Haryngton,* of Alcaston, was 
apparently in precisely similar circumstances with John 
Urwyke, his goods being valued at two pounds (which would 
be equivalent to something between £20 and £25 of present 
valuation), and the subsidy which he paid being one shilling, 
or equivalent to 20s. or 25s. of modem coinage. 

Most of the other tenantry of Felhampton, the Marsh, 

• Richard Haryngton we surmise to have been the son of Sir James Haryngton 
(now deceased), by his wife Joan de Nevile, Richard being then 38 years of age 
or under. 


Downe, etc., are by no means suggestive of a northern 
extraction; but there are exceptions, as Butler, and more 
especially Marston, who was then of Afcott,* and whose 
family have held the freehold until of late, but now alas ! 
they have sold it. Afcott adjoins Felhampton on the south 
side, and a little to the east, and having a very convenient 
and pretty residence on the estate, in addition to the farm- 
house, which probably occupies the site of the more ancient 
residence ; this additional residence, called Afcott House, has 
in modem times been a favourite place of retirement for the 
older members of the occupants of Felhampton or their 

But it is of the old days we are speaking. The Marstons 
were evidently in more opulent circumstances than their Fel- 
hampton neighbours, being, as to goods, valued at £3, and 
consequently having to pay a subsidy of Is. 6d. This was* 
Eswardus, or Edward, Marston, who came of & Lincolnshire 
family, but the awkward break in their pedigree, which we 
find in an old manuscript,t is vividly suggestive of their 
having belonged to the little band of exiles which included 
Haryngton and Urswyk. We find other names of tenantry 


• An ancient record, dated 15 April, 13 16, says that Richard, Lord of Affecote, 
gave to his son Roger, and to Joan, daughter of Roger de Leynthall, his 
lands, tenements, and lordship of Affecote, with all rights, liberties, and free 
customs thereto pertaining. Witnesses — Adam de Sibbeton, Walter Scot, of 
Acton, Walter Bareth, Robert, the clerk of Stanton Lacy, WiUiam Aleyn, of the 
same, Richard, son of Robert de Heytons, Robert de MolineshuU, and others. 

t Add. MSS., No. 30,330, folios 168 and 169. 


in this neighbourhood entered same time^ rated at £2, £3, 
and £4, but only one as valued in lands, and that at £1 only. 
This "was Edmund Ness ; probably he was an old inhabitant 
of that country (we find ^^ Great Ness" about seven miles to 
the north-west of Shrewsbury). His son (or near kinsman), 
as we suppose Richard Ness to be, is valued in goods at £2 ; 
Thomas Davys in goods at £4 ; Richwd Dudde in goods at 
£4 ; Richard Yoppe in goods at £3 ; Richard Butler in goods 
at £2 ; Richard Harris in goods at £2.* Do they not appear 
to have been singularly attached to the name of Richard ? 
Why ? Probably reminiscences of Bosworth field had some- 
what to do with it. The two Henrys taxed their subjecta 
rather heavily, though from different motives. 

We may gather some idea of the position of an English 
yeoman in those days from the following scrap from the 
writings of an old author, one Mr. Harrison. He says that 
in Queen Mary's days the Spaniards who visited this country 
were made to wonder at the ^^ large diet" which was used in 
many of these so homely cottages, and one of them, a man of 
no small reputation, remarked that ^^ these English have 
their houses made of sticks and dirt, but they fare commonly 
as well as the king." 

But, as more appropriate, referring as it does to the same 
period as the Felhampton subsidy, viz., the reign of Henry 
the 8th, we may quote the venerable Hugh Latimer, when in 

• These were probably bom soon after Bosworth fight, as the lapse of years is 
38 : battle fought in 1485, subsidy taken in 1523. 


one of his sermons he describes the economy of a farmer of 
hiB time, and tells us that ^^his father who was a yeoman, 
had no lands of his own, but only a farm of three or four 
pounds a year at the utmost^ and hereupon he tilled so much 
as kept half a dozen men, that he had a walk for an hundred 
sheep, and that his mother milked thirty kine. He kept his 
son at school till he went to the University, and maintained 
him there. He married his daughters with £5 or 20 nobles 
apiece ; kept hospitality with his neighbours, and gave some 
alms to the poor, and all this he did out of the said farm." 

Land at that time was let at about one shilling per acre ; 
but on the Welsh borders, or in thickly-wooded countries 
elsewhere, it was probably even half that amount. And we 
may take Latimer's picture of a yeoman's life as a fair one to 
represent that of the Felhampton tenantry ; although if they 
began upon ^^ nought but what they carried about them," 
they must have been an industrious folk to attain to any 
affluence, and we can scarcely think that they quite vied 
with the parents of " the venerable Hugh." But who can 
tell, if there were no mouthpiece to trumpet their deeds, 
either in rostrum or pulpit, what hidden deeds of healthy 
industry may have been accomplished at old Felhampton 
during those few centuries when they " Ate their own lamb, 
their chicken, and ham; They shear'd their own fleece, 
and they wore it." And in days more near to us, they would 
still wind their wool on a great wheel, would grow flax and 
hemp, which the good wife would spin with her maidens in 

200 kiry^i::^* or the fajclt cf r 

thi5f lonxr er^.:r-^*, and tr.e criattv f,Ii tr&Te":r>g weaver, ever 
wcJeome, provided te wa% Loner: bat wto will dare to cast 
a shadow np^iX* the Lonoor of an *• old weaver.** that dear 
departed race ?^ for he wovld weave with the materials the 
good wife gavf^ him, srach clotij*, »7ich dimity. a« would live, 
aje^ rtill lives, to «hame the shoddy we are doomed to bay in 
thin 19th century. But this is letting old &ncie6 and present 
memories run away with us. In the reign of Qneen Eliza- 
bethy ibe value of land rapidly increased, bat the comforts 
and luxuries of the farmers were greatly augmented. 

We now turn to the second subadj^ which contains the 
names of the contributors, whether in lands or goods, and 
thus forms a census of the inhabitants, which probably was 
the object aimed at; the collections in intervening years 
being simply financial statements of the sums collected in 
each district* It is dated the 35th of Henry the Sth's reign, 
riz., twenty years later than that already described, and is 
headed ^^ Ffellampton and 3farshe" (or ifershe, as they 
sometimes spelt it). It is needless to enumerate all the 
tenantry ; they are all rated in goods. John Urwyk's name 
no longer appears, but Richard Urwyke is there, rated at £5, 
and paying a subsidy of Is. 8d., or 4d. in the pound. By 
this we may judge that John was deceased, and that Richard 
was his son, and likewise conjecture that ^^ Agnes Urwyke, 
widow/' was Richard's mother. Agnes Urwyke, widow, and 
William Urwyke (probably a younger son, or brother of 

• 166—155, 35 Hen. VIII., A.D. 1543. 


Bichard) are both rated at £1, and pay each 2d. This 
assessment of 2d. in the pound applied also to one John 
Street, who was valued at £3, but all those of £5 and upwards 
were taxed at the rate of 4d. in the pound. ^' Richard Yoppe," 
for instance, who seems to have been in great affluence, being 
rated at £8, has to pay the sum of 26. 8d. 

Richard Haryngton had now shifted his abode to Little 
Stretton, three miles north of Felhampton, and was therefore 
no longer so near a neighbour of his old kinsmen, John's 
descendants. Now that old John TJrwyke was no more, 
possibly the associations were weakened, and the Haryngtons 
became mindful of their more illustrious descent. Richard 
Haryngton is here rated in goods at £6 13s. 4d., and pays a 
subsidy of 28., which is 4d. in the pound on the £6. We 
cannot explain the mystery of the odd 138. 4d. 

There is another subsidy* two years later, viz., in the year 
1545, when the name of Urwyke does not appear in the 
collections for *' Felhampton," but only Richard Yoppe, rated 
at £8 and taxed 5s. 4d., and Edward Taylor, rated at £5 and 
paying 38. 4d. Also at Stbeford we find Edwardus Marston, 
whose possessions are valued at £6, and he pays 4s. Richard 
Haryngton, of Little Stretton, is valued at £5, and pays 
3s. 4d., but now there appears a Thomas Harington, valued 
at £6 and paying 4s., which leads us to surmise that possibly 
Richard was the son of Richard Harington first mentioned, 
and that Thomas was his elder brother, but it is by no means 

• 166—187, Z7 Hen. VIII. 


conclusiye, as the old gentleman may have retired from 
agricultural pursuits, and holding but a small tenure, hare 
been rated low accordingly. 

The next entry of the name of Urwyke is found four years 
after the above, and occurs in the succeeding reign of Edward 
the 6th. There are three subsidies in the one year of 1649,* 
and the name is once spelt Urwyke, and twice Urwicke, aad 
the latter mode remained after this period, with the exception 
of the dropping of the final e in more modem times. These 
collections are headed ^^ Phellaton and Streford," and John 
Urwyke or Urwicke is rated in goods at £10, and pays 10s. 
each time, also Richard Yoppe and John Walker the same. 
And now again the name of Thomas Harington appears as 
of Little Stretton, similarly rated, and paying the same Is. 
per 20s. of valuation. 

It was in the first year of this good young king's reign, 
viz., on the 16th February, 1547,t that an act was passed 
releasing small landed proprietors from the burden of 
compulsory knighthood which was found in times of peace 
to be heavy upon them, not only from their being obliged to 
have a certain quota of men at their command, but also from 
certain expenses attending the ceremony of taking out their 
patents. Sir Richard Rich, Sir Richard Southwell, and Sir 
Thomas Moyse were commissioned to compound with such 
persons as desired exemption. But it is unlikely that our 

• 167—3, 167 — 9, 167— II, 3 Edw. VI. 
t Rymer Tom XV,, page 124. 


friends of Felhampton and Little Stretton were in any way 
affected or benefited by this amendment, as they had for a 
long time been in the position of simple yeomen or tenant- 

No subsidy appears to have been levied during the short 
and troubled reign of Queen Mary, The next entry of the 
names of tenantry appears in the 13th year of the reign of 
Queen Elizabeth,* and is headed " Ffellaton, Downe, Marshe, 
Alcaston, Affecote, Streford, and Omeysgrove."t The person 
who made this collection was certainly not a learned scribe, 
for several names are mis-spelt; for example, Marston is 
written Marson, Baldwyn Bawden, and John Urwicke's name 
is spelt Yerricke, which is evidently a phonetic rendering. 

John Urwicke (alias Yerricke) is here rated in goods at £3, 
and pays 5s., as do several others, as Burnell, Butler, Mason, 
Marston, and Taylor ; while Charles Baldwyn is rated at £4, 
and pays 6s. 8d. ; and Watts, James, and Blucke are rated at 
£5, paying each 8s. 4d. Thomas Haryngton, of Stretton, is 
rated at £3, and pays 5s. 

The collectors appear to have had a very hasty and 
superficial method of grouping the districts included in their 
rounds under one head, as "Felhampton," for example; and 
when they did make mention of the names of the othdr places 

• 167 — 41, A.D. 1570. 

t Omeus, or Omus grove, evidently from the wild or mountain ash which 
there abounds. It is now known as the *' Grove/* till of late the property of 
Lord Craven. 


in their beat, — Down, The Marsh, Strefford, etc., — ^they never 
particularised the inhabitants of each locality, so that we 
have to go upon conjecture that Urwick was of Felhampton, 
Marston of Afcott, etc. We have, however, some exceptions, 
and we find one in the reign of Charles the 1st, as will 
presently appear. 

The succeeding subsidy taken in the 35th year of good 
Queen Bess's reign, now claims our attention, headed ^^ Fell- 
hampton," and running thus :— 

Subsidy 167 — 86, A.D. 1592. 

Thomas Mason, in 


ds, £^ - . 

I OS. 8d. 

John Marston, 

£^ - - 

108. 8d. 

Charles Baldwyn, 

£^ - - 

108. 8d. 

Robert Burnell, 

£6 - . 

- i6s. od. 

Francis Burnell, 

£3 - - 

88. od. 

John Urwicke, 

£3 ■ ■ 

8s. od. 

Richard Yoppe, 

£3 - - 

8s. od.. 

William Blucke, 

£3 - - 

8s. od. 

Thomas Butler, 

£3 - • 

8s. od. 

Edward Ness is rated in lands at £2 ; Thomas Baugh in lands at £1 6s. 8d.; 
Thomas James, sen., at £2 ; Thomas James, jun., at £1, — and each taxed at 
48. in the pound, viz., paying respectively 88., 5s. 4d., 8s., and 4s. It will 
be noticed that those assessed in goods paid at the rate of 2s. 8d. in the 
pound. John Haryngton, of Little Stretton, was assessed in lands, 40s., 
and paid 8s. 

Next we find a subsidy of the 21st year of James the 1st, 
under the head of ^* Afcot and Felhampton," and here all the 
tenants are rated in lands. It evidently includes many of the 
adjoining estates before mentioned. 










2 OS., , 

, 4S. 

40Sm » 

, 8s. 

408m , 

» 8s. 

408., , 

, 8s. 

20S., , 

. 48. 

308., , 

, 6s. 

20S., , 

» 48. 

20S., , 

, 48. 

80s., , 

, 16s. 

The Kst runs as follows : — 

Subsidy 167 — 166, A.D. 1623. 
Richard James, in terris^ 20s., paid 4s. 
Edward Urwicke, 
William Ness, 
Richard Baugh, 
Edward Marston, 
William Jurdan, 
Edward Harries, 
Roger Posterne, 
Thomas Baughe, 
John Thynne, Esq., 

We have no means of determining where this John Thynne 
or Thinne, Esq., was then located. We find in Collins' 
Peerage that Sir John Thynne died 2l8t September, 1604, 
and it is stated that his second son John was seated at 
Church Stretton, but his name does not here appear as of 
Stretton, but as contiguous to Felhampton, so possibly at that 
period he may have been at Alcaston.* Again we find John 
Haryngton at Little Stretton, rated in terria^ i.e.y in lands, at 
30s., and paying, like Harries, the subsidy of 6s. 

The next list of names which appears is taken on the 
accession of the unfortunate Charles the Ist, and judging 

• With regard to the old family of Thynue, or "The-Inn," a history of them 
mSy be found in the work by Beriah Botfield, entitled ** Memorials of the Families 
of De Boteville, Thynne, and Botfield of Salop and Wilts." In the village of 
Homingham, Wilts, stands a little chapel, dated 1566, which was built by some 
Scottish Presbyterian artisans, employed in building Sir John Thynne's mansion 
at Longleat, upon some land of which Sir John granted them a lease, the said 
artisans having been wont to meet for worship previously in Penny's Wood. 



from the valuation being exactly similar, it would seem that 
Walter Blunt, Esq., was now occupying the same estate 
which was previously held by John Thynne, Walter Blunt's 
name stands first on the list headed ^^ Felhampton,'' which 
indeed we cannot but suppose was a kind of central depdt for 
these collections. Possibly the Great Hall may have still 
been in existence, and occupied by the landlord; the 
remainder being underlet in holdings of varied extent. Here 
follows the subsidy in question, viz., of the 1st year of the 
reign of Charles I. 

A.D. 1625, Subsidy 167 — 184. 

Walter Blunt, Esq., in ierris, 80s., paid i6s. 

William Ness, 

Edward Marston, 

Edward Urwicke, 

Thomas Banghe, 

Roger Posteme, 

Richard James, 

Andrew Posteme 

William Craven', Esq., for 

the farm of Ornesgrove „ 
Richard Baughe, 
William Jurdan, 

Under the head of ** Little Stretton," we find, as in 1623, John Haiyngton 
rated in lands at 3os.» and taxed 6s. 

The Interregnum, or Commonwealth, so called, gave birth 
to a deep-thinking, self-denying, and of necessity a suffering 
race called Puritans. Feeling that the licence of the age left 
them only the hope of the hypocrite if they halted between 









40s., . 

, 8s. 

40s., „ 

, 8s. 

20s., „ 

. 4S. 

20s., , 

, 4S. 

20s., , 

, 4S. 

20s., , 

, 43. 

20s., , 

► 4S. 

30S., , 

, 6s. 

20s., , 

, 4S. 

20S., , 

, 4S. 


two opinions, they denied themselves many things which 
God has given us richly to enjoy, in order to oppose, by 
superior force, the Satanic army who are ever striving to 
turn God's blessings into a curse upon His creatures of 
mankind. Much glory and praise be unto their noble army, 
and to the martyrs who sprang from them. 

These Puritan families were guiding stars for future 
generations. One line of the descendants of the Felhampton 
Pilgrim (as we may appropriately term him) enlisted itself on 
the side of those who sympathized with the Parliament, and 
appears to have in some degree become consequently separated 
from the rest of the family, who accepted not their political 
views. Thus after the expiration of the Commonwealth, and 
at the accession of Charles the 2nd, on the 2nd October, 1661, 
a system of free subscriptions having been instituted through- 
out the country in the new monarch's favour, we have an 
opportunity of judging to a certain degree the amount of 
enthusiasm which more or less prevailed with the various 
contributors. Take, for example, the names which occur in 
the list within the hundred of Mounslow, where we find, after 
diligently searching down column after column, the following 
names : — 

Lay Subsidy i68 — 214, 13 Carl. II., 1661. 

William Urwick, yeoman as. od. 

Samuel Urwick, yeoman ----- is. 6d. 

Edward Urwick, of Felhampton - - - 4s. od. 
Also of Stretton we find — 

John Harrington, gentleman - - - - 6s. od. 

William Harrington, yeoman - - - - is. od. 


Now the fact of John Uaryngton signing himself ^^ gentle- 
man/' and being liberal in his subscription^ leads us to 
conjecture not only that was he a loyalist, but that he 
considered himself somewhat higher in the social scale than 
his neighbour of Felhampton. We have no means of ascer- 
taining the future fate of this Stretton family. 

Haryngtons and Urwicks named side by side in the Lay Subsidies 
AS resident in Shropshire from a.d. 1523 to 1662. 

Jomr Ubswiok, brother of Ghristopher, ag«d 40 at the battle of Boeworth, slam, or fled 
with hU BOH into Shropshire with Sir Jaicbs Habthqtoh, where in 1623 we find 

the familieB thus : — 

Lay Bubitdy, 

X^a_\*yj { John Ubwyx, Felhampton — ^Aoms, named as his widow, 15 Hen. Vlll. 1523. 

A -6* I RTfnrAHT> HABTNOTOir, AlcftBton. I 

^f>f. , <.£ / Rtorakt) Urwtk, Felhampton. / Wiluajc Ubwti:, FeUuunpton. 

100—100 ^ j^xBg Habyhoton, Little Stretton. \ Thokas Habtkqtof, 35 & 37 Hen.Vm. 

I [1543, 1545. 

167 — ^9, 3, 11 / Joair Urwioeb, Streford, and John Ubwiokb, FheUamton. 
166—187 \ Thomas Habtvotoh, Little Stretton, 3 Edw. YI. 1549. 

167—41 / ^^^^ Ubwtk (Terrick), 13 Eliz. 1571. 
\ Thoxab Habynotoh, Little Stretton. 

I ^1. A^ / John Ubwioke, Felhampton. 

10/— 00 ^ j^^^ Habinqton, Little Stretton, 36 Eliz. 1592-3. 

1 A7 1 AA / ^v^JEtD Ubwioke, Felhampton. 

10/— 100 j j^^^ Habinoton, Little Stretton, 21 James I. 1623-4. 

1A7 lAA / ^WABD Ubwioke, Felhampton. 

10/ 10% ^ j^j^ Habynoton, I Little Stretton, 1 Charles I. 1625-6. 

I [hampton. | | 

168—214 / ^▼^J"> Ubwick, Fel- WnuAic Ubwiok, yeoman SaihtblUbwiok, yeoman, 
\ John Habbinoton, TVhuah Habbinoton, 13 Ghas. n. 1662. 

[gentleman. [yeoman. (Urwicks of Hanwood 

(Urwicks of Felhampton.) (Urwicks of Bishop's Castle.) and Shelton.) 

''**^ ^'"^^ *'^^ *''^ *'*^ *'*¥m *^*iC i*fc*; 


'E now turn to the three names above quoted, of 
Edwabd, Samuel, and William Uewick {temp. 
Chas. II., A.D. 1661), and finding after careful 
scrutiny, no other recurrence of the name in the Salopian 
records, we may without fear of committing an error, regard 
them as the three parent stems (sprung from the old trunk, 
the fugitive Yorkist of the 15th century) from whom 
descended the several families of Shrewsbury and Shelton, 
Bishops Castle and The Moor, Clungunford and Broom, &c.; 
and from them the " old home " of Felhampton was continu- 
ously supplied with a tenant of the name, though by no means 
in direct lineal inheritance. There was and has been evidently, 
for generations in succe«aon, a feeling which has maintained 
this old association with the home of their forefathers, but 
these loves of the bygone age are becoming dimmer day by 



day and year by year; material, practical, and preeant 
necessities, or what are so deemed to be, become the all- 
absorbing thought. Family history is but little studied, 
these diyings into the past are utterly obscured, and a man 
knows not, forsooth, who his grandfather was. How different 
were the old monkish days when genealogies were traced 
with the most careful attention. We can imagine old 
Haryngton and old Urswick meeting alternately at Felhamp- 
ton and Alcaston, and crooning over their bygone troubles, 
their fierce struggles, their wounds, and their defeat; and 
how their sons would find less and less pleasure in hearing 
these tales as time rolled on, and think their parents might 
have done better for them. But better for them they could 
not have done, for they either landed them, or bred them, in 
a land of peace and plenty, where their future fortunes, so 
far as worldly prosperity may so be termed, were secured. 
A land abounding in rich pastures, grass-clad hills which 
make the long-tailed flocks grow fat, fertile valleys for the 
beeves and finer breeds of sheep, producing in these latter 
days the ^^ Shropshire Downs"; and where do the former, 
viz., the beeves, thrive better? whether they be Shorthorns, 
or those honest and quiet-looking old broad white-faced, 
curly-hided, dark ruddy red-coated Herefords. And what 
land grows such barley, and what barley makes such malt, 
and what good housemfe of all those who so abound in that 
hospitable country, did ever out of that malt brew, sitting up 
all night, such soft and sweet and silky ale as that which was 


served at Felhampton ? Do not attempt to answer it, dear 
kinsmen ; those times are fled, the housewife ceases to brew 
in many places, because the exciseman perchance has a yoice 
in the matter, or perchance because it is " too much trouble." 
Let us not ever lay the flattering unction to our lazy bodies 
that bought articles are equal to home-made. 

The Shrewsbury and Shelton branches of the Urwick 
family were in all probability one, until differences of taste 
and education or of religious opinions may have somewhat 
separated them. Some have been engaged in trade, others 
in agriculture, and of late years a descendant of that family, 
bom in Shrewsbury, lived afterwards and died at Stow- 
in-the-Wold, GHoucestershire.* 

'We now come to speak of the Hanwood and Shelton Urwicks, 
originally a Puritan family, who appear to have taken mow 
pains than the other branches to preserve their pedigree, as 
ii shewn in the genealogical table. 

Samuel Ubwige, bom between the years 1630 and 1635, and 
Edward, afterwards the Rev. Edward Ubwick, rector of 
Eastham, near Tenbury, Woroestershire, from 1690 until his 

* Namely, Thomas Urwick, whose second daughter Elizabeth, on the 3rd of 
February, 1881, was married to James Austin Drayton, of Oxford, son of T. 
Drayton, of London. The late Thomas Urwick, of Stow, had two surviving 
brothers, viz., one at Welshpool, and one at Clifton, near Nottingham, seat of 
Sir Jakes Clifton. Mr. Drayton writes: — "Priscilla Symonds was my wife's 
great grandmother. Miss Yellowly was a cousin of my wife's father." See 
tabular pedigrees. Some descendants of the family still living remember Miss 
Yellowly' s long letters to her cousins, sealed with five seals. 


death in 1701, were probably brothers. Edward was maater 
of the Tenbury school. His wife Martha was buried on Ibe 
29th of September, 1 695, as shewn in the old parish roister 
of Eastham* 

From Samuel Urwick, of Shelton, descended Samuel, bom 
20th July, 1687. 

This WM ths Samnel Urwick who in i737»* in the Easter tenn, bought of 
Matthew Travers, gentleman, and of John Lowe and of Anne Lowe, 
spinster, conjointly, a messuage, old bam, garden, orchard, and twelve acres 
of land (meaning arable land), also four acres of meadow, twelve acres of 
pasture with appurtenances in the parishes of St. Chadd (or Chads) and 
Great Hanwood in the liberties of Shrewsbury. 

Also in i739t Samuel Urwick bought of Heniy <jriffithe8 and his wife 
Alice, and of George Calcott, Esq., and Sarah his wife, fifty acres of arable 
land, twenty acres of meadow, ten acres of pasture, and ten acres of furze 
and heath, with appurtenances in the township of Cruckton, parish of 
Pontesbury, being four to five miles s.w. of Shrewsbury. 

Samuel Urwick had two sons, William and Thomas. Of 
the younger son Thomas, let us first speak, and afterwards 
of his brother William. 

Thomas Ubwick, second son of Samuel Urwick, was bom 
on the 8th December, 1727, at Shelton, near Shrewsbury 
where he received his classical education. He was sub- 
sequently under the care of the Rev. Job OrtoA, whose 
ministry his parents attended, so far as his religious education 
was concerned ; his academical studies being pursued from 
1747 under the direction of Dr. Doddridge at Northampton, 

• See Fines, in Record Office, Fetter Lane, -No. 307. 
t Fines, Nos. 307 and 471 are 11 and 13 George II. 


till the death of that eminent divine. In 1762 he went to 
the University of Glasgow, where he finished his academic 
studies under Dr. Leechman. He was for many years a 
minister at Worcester (1754-1775), and was universally 
respected. At that time we find that he was married, but we 
do not learn that he had any family. On leaving Worcester, 
for the sake of greater retirement, he and Mrs. Urwick spent 
a short time with some friends near London, and then 
removed to Narborough, near Leicester; but he was after- 
wards prevailed upon to ' accept the non-conformist ministry 
which was vacant by the death of Dr. Fumeaux at Clapham 
in 1779. He was chosen to succeed the Rev. Hugh Farmer 
as trustee for the Academy in which he had been educated, 
which was then fixed at Wymondley, afterwards called 
Coward College. 

This Rev. ThomM Urwick was always spoken of with great 
respect, not only by the body to which he belonged, but also 
by members of the Established Church. One of his good 
deeds has been especially mentioned.* By his kindly advice 
and intervention, he succeeded in rescuing from a very 
unhappy situation a youth named Joseph Lancaster, who was 
in danger of being lost to his parents and to the world, and 
restoring him to a sphere of usefulness. This was the Joseph 

* Monthly Repository, Vol. II., 1807, p. 161. Gentleman's Mag,, 1807, p. 282. 
Also Bible Truths and Church Errors , by W. Urwick, M.A., p. 236 sqq. See 
also Sketches t part i, by Henry Dunn, 1848. A portrait in crayons of the Rev. 
Thomas Urwick hangs in the room of the Coward Trustees, New College, Hamp- 
stead, presented to the Trustees by Dr. Wilkinson, April 8, 1834. 


Lancaster who afterwards distinguished himself by intro- 
ducing an expeditious method of teaching, designated the 
Lancasterian system. The Rev. Thomas Urwick died at 
Balham Hill, near Clapham, in the 81st year of his age, 
having been for 26 years pastor of the Protestant dissenting 
church in the parish of Clapham. He lies buried in a tomb 
on the north side of the old church, known as St. Paul's of 
that ilk, having died on the 26th February, 1807. Here also 
are deposited the remains of his wife Mary, who died 17th 
Jime, 1791, aged 66. 

A very old and attached friend of the family, who was 
engaged in business with the long since departed Thomas 
Urwick, of 11, Rood Lane, and afterwards of 34, Great Tower 
Street, who was also partner in the same business with his 
son William Urwick who died in 1860, stated that on the 
occasion of the Rev. Thomas Urwick coming to London from 
his native place of Salop in 1779, he was accompanied by 
this other above-mentioned Thomas Urwick, who was then a 
young man about to seek his fortune in the great city. 
This indicates, in the absence of registers or any other 
substantial testimony, a friendly link of kinship between 
the two branches of Shelton and Broom, and we must not 
omit to add that Thomas Urwick, of London, was of the 
same religious persuasion as his Reverend kinsman, and 
was a constant frequenter of the Weighhouse Chapel, which 
was formerly in Eastcheap. His descendants, however, have 
adhered to the Established Church. 


William Urwick, of Sbelton, was bom the 29th September, 
1726. He married on the 26th December, 1749, ElUnor 1^ 
Eddowes,* eldest daughter of Ralph Eddowes, of White WU;ttln;r«.U^ 
Hurst, by his second wife Ellinor Carter, of Shrewsbury. aiop . 

This William Urwick must have increased the estate of his ^^^ .^t^, 
father Samuel, as is evident from the amount of property cUurch 3 Apr. i7i 
sold in the next generation, but not coming under the head a^a diei 9Jimc i 
of *^ Fines," we do not obtain any record of it. This William 
Urwick, son of Samuel, died on 24th February, 1766. 

William Uewick, son of the above William and Ellinor 
Urwick, was born 2nd October, 1760. On the 6th of April, 
1779, he married Ellinor Eddowes,t a niece of his mother, 
viz., the second daughter of her brother Joshua (son of Ralph 
aforesaid). It was probably on this occasion of his marriage 
that he, William Urwick, in order to make a home for his 
bride and himself, did at Michaelmas, 1780,:^ purchase of 
William Salkeld and his wife Hannah (on the morrow of All 
Souls) a messuage and half an acre of land with appurtenances 
at Hencott in the parish of St. Alkemunds in the town of 
Shrewsbury. This William Urwick, son of William and 

• Ellinor Tfeu Eddowes was born 3rd April, 1716, and died 8th June, I7§5. Her 
father Ralph was baptised 28th February, 1686, and buried ist February, 1727. 
Great Hanwood is a parish three and a half miles from Shrewsbury on the 
road leading to Montgomery. The township of Shelton gives its name to the 
wide -famed Oak, from which Owen Glendwr is said to have beheld the battle of 

t Ellinor bom December 26th, 1757, died June 23rd, 1853. Joshua Eddowes, 
printer, was bom 15th April, 1724, married to Lydia Phillips, of Horsman's Green, 
died 23rd September, 181 1. 

t Feet of Fines, 430, Michaelmas term, 21 Geo. III. 


grandson of Samuel, disposed of the whole of his landed 
property, which had been accumulated by himself, his father, 
and grandfather, in Easter term, 1790, viz., one year before 
the birth of his son William. Supposing this to be an error 
in taste and judgment, as it now appears to us, other members 
of the family have done the same thing, have disposed of 
their landed property, and invested the proceeds in trade^ as 
did this William Urwick, preferring a present affluence or 
what appeared to them so to be, to the anxieties, thrift, and 
varying profits, but at the same time certain advantages as 
regards health and social status, which we cannot fail to 
recognize in an agricultural life. 

The particulars of the sale in question are as follows, viz.:* 

That within eight days of the Purification of the Blessed Mary, William 
Urwick and Ellinor his wife (deforciants) sold to Walter Tench, gentleman 
(plaintiff), three messuages, twelve gardens, loo acres of land, loo acres of 
meadow, 150 acres of pasture, besides common land (for all manner of 
cattle), with appurtenances in the parishes of St. Chad, Great Han wood, 
and Pontesbury. 

A year after the sale of this property comprising 360 acres 
or rather more, William Urwick (son of William and Ellinor) 
was bom on the 8th December, 1791; and his father died on 
the 7th April, 1799.t He entered the Dissenting College of 
HoxtonJ on the 29th July, 1812, then under the care of Dr. 

• Feet of Fines, 345, Easter term, 31 Geo. III. (1790). 

t TAe Life and Letters of William Urwick^ D,D,, of Dublin, edited by his 
son ; published by Hodder & Stoughton, 27, Paternoster Row. 

X Founded in 1744. Dr. Simpson was appointed in 1791. 


Robert Simpson, M.A., having been previously the pupil of 
the Rev. Thomas Belsher, of the Red House School, Rainbow 
Hill, Worcester. On the 16th of June, 1818, he married 
Sarah, the second daughter of Mr. Thomas Cooke, of 
Shrewsbury. His earnest and faithful work of Evangelizing 
or Protestantizing in Ireland may be read in the work 
by his son by any who may be interested in the memory of 
this worthy and pious man. Here we will content ourselves 
with a few remarks made by the Rev. Edward Steane, D.D., 
Hon. Sec. of the Evangelical Association, in his '^Personal 

He speaks of William Urwick's first pastoral charge at Sligo, where he 
laboured for ten years, captivating his Irish congregation by his lively and 
alfectionate manner, and acquiring a great moral influence over the people 
generally. After the ten years had elapsed, Mr. Urwick's sphere of action 
was removed to Dublin. 

At that period (Mr. Steane goes on to say) duelling was much in vogue, 
and hearing on an occasion that a field officer who had served under 
Wellington, and fought bravely at Badajoz, had received a challenge, Urwick 
sought and gained a private interview with the would-be antagonist, found 
him dining with his family, all of them ignorant of what was about to take 
place, and by his persuasive argument succeeded in preventing the duel. 

Dr. Urwick was very highly esteemed, not only by his own denomination, 
but by every member of the Church where his ministry was conducted ; nor 
were his friendships restricted to Ireland only, for many distinguished men 
in England and other countries numbered him among their most valued 
correspondents. He received the degree of D.D. from Dartmouth College, 
U.S.A., in 1832. 

The Right Hon. Joseph Napier, ez-Lord Chancellor of Ireland, spoke of 
him as being ** firm in his views, gentle in his intercourse, strong in his 


gentleness, and firm in his faith/' He was the author of many publications 
on evangelical and prophetic subjects, — a score of which may be seen in the 
Library of the British Mnseom. Dr. and Mrs. Urwick had hve children 
bom to them during their residence in Sligo. Two died in early infancy. 
Samuel, aged six, died in 1838 ; their second son, Thomas Hawley, a yoong 
and aspiring civil engineer, engaged upon a new railway in Kentucky, 
died on the 6th of October, 1854, at Louisville, U.S. His mother had 
died two years previously, viz., on the sist of August, 1852, in the 
6fst year of her age. And now he was bereft of all but his three 
daughters and one son, William, a student of Dublin University, where 
be had gained honours, and was then occupying a ministry at Hatherlow, 
Cheshire. Doctor Urwick died on the i6th of July, 1868, and was buried 
in the family vault at Mount Jerome Cemetery. Among his friends who 
belonged to the Established Church were Dr. Daly, afterwards Bishop of 
Cashel; Dr. Singer, afterwards Bishop of Meath; Dr. Gregg, afterwards 
Bishop of Cork ; Dr. Todd, librarian of Trinity College ; Sydney Smith, 
professor of Biblical Greek, 

We should have liked to have been able by some means to 
trace the connexion of the Shelton family with the other 
Urwicks of Shrewsbury, of whom we hear as having settled 
in Welshpool, etc., but in a kind reply to a note of enquiry 
addressed to the Rev. John Breese, rector of Hanwood ( 1 880), 
that gentleman regrets that some eight or nine years since 
the register books were destroyed by fire, and he finds among 
the tombstones of the family none earlier in date than 30th 
July, 1772, being in memory of an infant daughter of Samuel 
and Priscilla Urwick, who was evidently Samuel the brother 
of William of Shelton, and of the Rev. Thomas Urwick, of 
Clapham. Another Samuel Urwick of later date, for whom 
we cannot render an account, was a grandson, representing 


the Bishop's Castle or Beckjay family. He in the Michaelmas 
term of the year 1818,* with his wife Elizabeth, sold an 
estate exceeding 100 acres in Edgerley to William Price, Esq. 
Edgerley is situated about twelve miles n.w. of Shrewsbury, 
about two miles n.e, of Melverley. 

Some four or five generations back, no doubt the Urwicks 
of the Moor and other Bishop's Castle branches were closely 
linked together as one family, but afterwards we find them 
in three distinct families, namely, that of Broom, that of the 
Moor, and that of Beckjat. 

The Broom family is represented by John Urwick and his 
family of Crowsmoor in Salop, and by the sons of the late 
WiUiam Urwick, of London, the eldest representative being 
W. H. Urwick, and next to him Samuel John Urwick, the 
writer of these memoirs being the third son. 

Of the Moor family, we have first Benjamin Urwick of the 
Moor, on occasion of whose marriage with Miss Collins an 
estatet passed from the hands of his father-in-law and 
mother-in-law, namely, Thomas Collins, gentleman, and Jane 
his wife in the year 1765. This Benjamin had a son, 
Richard, afterwards of Montgomeryshire, a tanner. He, in 
turn, was the father of Edward of " the Moor," and after- 
wards of Felhampton; also of Richard Urwick, whose 

• Fines, No. 371, 59 Geo. III. 

t " Consisting of two messuages, one bam, two gardens, an orchard, thirty 
acres of arable land, twenty of meadow, fifty of pasture, and ten of furze and 
heath, with appurtenances, in the parish of Norbury." Fines, Hilary term. 
No. 464, 6 Geo. III. 


residence near the village of Walton, Old Radnor, is noticed 
in Beauties of England and Wales.* This Richard had eight 
sons, of whom only one married, namely, Edwaed Urwick, 
of Presteign, Radnorshire. This Edwai'd was an invalid, and 
the care of his children, three sons and two daughters, 
devolved upon their uncle Richard. 

The Beckjay family were probably connected, as we have 
said, with the Urwicks of Hanwood through Samuel Urwick, 
son of the Samuel who married Priscilla Symonds (see the 
pedigree). The grandson Samuel Uewick, of Beckjay, 
married Elizabeth, daughter of Mr. Walker, of Stowe, having 
sons, — Samuel Walker Urwick, of Hereford, and William 
Walker Urwick, of London, who now represent this branch. 

The history of Felhampton is divided into three epochs, 
namely, the existence of three dwellings thereupon, — ^first, 
the Old Hall, or Great Hall or Grittall ; second, the Old Farm 
House, in the Old House Meadow; and third, Felhampton 
Court, for several generations the residence of Urwicks, and 
now occupied by John Hill, Esq. 

We left the succession of the Urwicks of Felhampton in 
the first year of the reign of Charles II.; we left it on 
compulsion, there being no further records to be gathered 
from Lay Subsidies, as government no longer deemed it 
necessary to adhere to such costly and extreme measures as 
that of taking the names of each individual taxpayer. 

• By Thos* Rees, F.S.A., p. 894. 


In consequence of this cessation, a lapse of some 80 years 
or odd occurs, during which time, it is probable, an Urwick 
of Felhampton existed and passed away. Again in the 
middle of the succeeding century, another Edward Urwick 
was of Felhampton (1740 to 1760), who was in the memory of 
those now depajiied as having had three daughters and no 
son. He was succeeded by a William Urwick, of Felhampton, 
of whom we only learn that he was six feet three inches in 
height, and is buried at the church of Acton Scott. He was 
succeeded by Edward Urwick, of the Moor, as previously 
stated; and Edward, by his son Richard, one of the best, 
kindest, and most hospitable of men, in whom perished the 
connexion, so long cherished of the name of Urwick with 
that of the old house of Felhampton ; he had no son to 
succeed him, and no member of the family restuned the 

Nothing more remains to be added. The details concerning 
the various members of now existing and lately existing 
branches of the Urwick family, and their connexion one with 
another are necessarily incomplete, but will be found, £U3 far 
as has been ascertained, in the tabular pedigrees that follow. 
The bygone history of the family is of as early a date as any 
Anglo-Norman of Saxon origin could desire, namely, from 
the Conquest. In the hands of any possessor of that divine 
afflatus which sheds a glamour over dry facts, it might become 
a very romantic history. But is that desirable ? and is not 
plain truth the best and most lasting tale ? The compiler 


has written nought here but what he belieyes to be plain 
TRUTH ; and he now affectionately bids his kinsmen cuJieu 
with this remark: — that as the possessors of the name of 
Urwick are, compared with the possessors of other family 
names, a remarkably small community, should the perusal of 
these Records tend in the slightest degree to excite or foster 
a feeling which may in any way conduce to the ^^ union in 
one common bond" of those various and perhaps scattered 
branches who owe their origin to the old Felhampton tree, 
then they will not have been written in yain. 


Q /durettn. m CoJl ..... 
6 Ce%t n Ura.Jc 

2. CiL^»cJc.Cla.cJc -. 



Explanation of thb Effigy of Christopher Urswick, page 124. 

The brass effigy of Christopher Urswick, still to be seen upon his altar 
tomb in the vestibule of Hackney Church, is of much interest ecclesiasti- 
cally, for such brasses are rare after 1520. It is very perfect, and distinctly 
shows the several Processional vestments worn by a priest in the sixteenth 
century, such, that is, as were used in the choir and in the body of the 
church or outside, but not at Mass. 

When the priest of this date would robe himself for service he would 
first put on the sandalia or shoes (i) ; next his Cassock of black (2) with 
close-dtting sleeves, and reaching down to the ground ; then thirdly the 
amicius or amice, a white collar covering the neck and shoulders (3), 
bending his head and reverently kissing it in the middle, on which a cross 
was worked. Fourthly he would put on the Alb or surplice of white linen 
(4), differing from the garment used in the English Establishment in 
having close instead of loose sleeves. Fifthly he would put on the anusse 
or almuce, a furred hood having long ends hanging down in front of the 
'dress (5), a garment worn by the clergy of the fifteenth and sixteenth 
centuries for warmth when officiating in church during cold weather. In 
the case of Dr. Urswick its lining would be the colour of the Oxford hood. 
This was worn by priests under the cope, and by canons over the cope. 
Sixthly he would put on the cope or cloak (6), with ophray or border 
evidently embroidered richly (7), and eighthly its morse or clasp, fastening it 
across the chest (8). Then lastly he would put on the hiretta or cap (9), 
and his equipment would be complete. In case of Mass he would require 
the Siole^ a band of embroidered silk across the shoulders and hanging 
down on each side in front, but not shown upon the brass. It is evident 
that preparation for service, as far at least as dress was concerned, must 
have been a serious matter, occupying no little time, with the clergy of 
those days. 

224 NOTES. 


Urswick Church. 

Lambeth Survey, circ. 1650, vol. iii., f. 76. ''The said Jurors doe affirm 
upon oath that the parish Church of Urswick (which said parish extends 
itself in longtitude four miles and a half, and in latitude three miles, the 
church being seated in the middle of the parish), is a vicaradge presentative 
from the Duchy of Lancaster, and that the Tythes of Come and graine are 
impropriate to Mr. Fleminge, of Rydall, Mr. Anderton, of Bardsley — 
papist delinquent, and to the Parishioners, worth in all sixty pounds per ann. 
to the Impropriators. And say further that the said parish conteynes 
within it the severall townshipps hereafter expressed, distant from their 
parish church as following, viz., 

Urswicke, where the church is seated, 

Siainton^ distant as aforesaid two miles and a halfe, 

Bardsley, two myles, 

Adgarlijft one myle and a halfe, 

Little Urswick, half a mile. 

And that there is lykewise belonging to the said Vicaradge a Vicaradge 
house in decay, and about two acres of gleabe land. And the said Jurors 
say likewise that there belongeth to the said vicaradge wooll, lambe, pigg, 
goose, hay, hempe, flaxe, and small tythes through the whole parish,, and 
that the value of the proffitts issueing out of the said vicaradge and 
belonging to the viccar, amounts to the sum of ;^2o per ann., and they doe 
say further that the viccar officiating the cure of the church is Mr. Nicholas 
Marshall, both viccar of the church and maister of the Free School, but 
that he is scandalous in life and negligent in both his callings." 

See Lambeth MSS., vol, 12, fol. 65-85. 


SAinmL Ubwiok,-« 
b. oiro. 1685, named in 
Subs. 13th Gharleci 11., 1661-2 
(aee p. 208), buried at Hanwood. 


bom July 20, 1687; mar. Aug. 28, 1722 ; died Ma; 

buried at Hanwood. Resided at Sbelti 

Shrewsbury to attend Rev. Job Orton' 

Elizabeth, Wiuuaic URWiaK,»EUinor E. Eddowes, 

b. Oct. 23, 1728, b. Sept. 29, 1725, 
d. Deo. 24, 1726. d. Feb. 24, 1766, 

of Shelton. 

b. Apr. 3, niarf ^ 

m. Deo. 26, 1749, 

d. June 8, 1795. 


WnuAX UBWicK,a-Ellinor Eddowes, Sarah, 

Thoicab UBWiaK,»Har7. 
b. Deo. 8, 1727, b. 1726, 
the Bey. Thoa. Urwick, d. 1791. 
minister of Glapham, no issue, 
d. Feb. 26, 1807, 

buried at Glapham. 


b. Oot. 2, 1760, 

d. Apr. 17, 1799, 

of Shrewsbury. 

b. Deo. 26, 1767, b. June 28, 1752, 
m. Apr. 6, 1779, d. Sept. 7, 1753. 
d. June 23, 1853, 
aged 95 years, buried at Hanwood. 








Sanh, Elinor, Sarah, Lydia, Wilxiax TIbwick, D.I 

b. Har. 20, 1780, b. June 11, 1781, bom and died b. Mar. 20, 1784, b. Deo. 8, 1791, 

d. May 8, 1780, d. Deo. 1, 1868, in 1783. d. Nov. 23, 1871. ordained June 19^ 18 1< 

buried at Hanwood. d. July 16, 1868. 

Sarah, Joseph, Elinor, 



Mary, William Ubwicx, M.A.»Sophia, dau. o 

b. May 22, b. and d. b. Not. 7, b. July 6, 1824, of Trinity Coll., Dublin, 
1820. 1821. 1822. d. Mar. 27, 1825. b. Mar. 8, 1826, 

ordained June 19, 1851, 
now of London and St. Albans. 

Thos. Hunter 
of Manchester 
b. Feb 18, 18 
m. June 1. 18 


Sarah »iSydney Turner Amy ^-Robert Goodbody, Wjujam Eddc 

Elisabeth, Klein, F.L.S., Sophia, B.A., Ubwzok, M.i 

m. Apr. 17, F.R.A.S. d. M!ay 5, m. July 4, 1882. of Trin. Coll., Oi 

1888. 1883. b. June 3, 18 


Sajcubl XJbwi* 
b. 1771, d. Feb. 16, 1861, in 
90th year, buried at Hanwo* 

Sarah,BsJohn Hassell, 
b. 1809, of Llanfair. 
d. 1879. 


Saxubl UBwiOK,=Elizabeth Josi 
b. 1810, now of I Hopwell, b. 1812, 
Gliften, Nottingham. I m. 1850, d. 1888. no 
Sarah Elizabeth, ^Charles Jaoksoi 
b. 1852, m. 1878. 

Sarah Ann<=sFrederiok Elizabeth,aBj. Austin Drayton, Josbfi 

m. Jan. 24, 1881. Wiokison. m. Feb. 1, 1881. of Oxford. b. 18 


Edwabd TJBWioKysMartlia, 
Bector of Eastham, Master of d. 1696. 
Tenbory School, Woroestenhire, 

b. oiro. 1640, d. 1701. (See Urwidks of Broom.) 

Sixon URWiaK,aBSarali Wright, 

died !fay 27, 1778; 

[ at SbeitoD, came to 
oh OrtoB'iminigtry. 

bom Feb. 23, 1697; died Sept. 7, 1788, 
buried at Hanwood, aged 91 years. 

[arr. flucuEL U]iwxoK,=BPriflcilla Symonds, 

1726, b.Sept 29,1729. 
^791. d. 1802, buried 
MBie. a t HanTfood. 






utm. Friflbilla, Tkoxaji 

d.Jaly80, 1772, 
agtdSyrs. &10 

m. Not. 9,~ 1769, b. Aug. 18, 1736, b. and d. b. Deo. 26, b. Sept. 23, 1741, 
d. at Hanwood 1801, d. May SO, 1772. 1738. 1739. d. June 12, 1770. 
bnried at Hanwood. 

Saiotsl UBWiaK,»Elizabeth Jobkph, Sarah « Jacob 
b. 1771, I Erans. liyed at Urwick. | Yallowley. 


^., buried at Thomas. Henry. Ann. Elilsa. 

I d. 1861. 

See UrwiokB of 

ncx, I)J)-'=Sarah, dan. of Thos. Cooke, of Shrewsbury, 

Shelton, A daughter, 
attended resided at Hanwood. 
Swan Hill, See Oh. Hulton*B 
no family. Wtt. at Shrews- 
bory, n. 286. 

i 19; 1816. 


b. Sept. 29, 1791, m. June 16, 1818, d. Aug. 21, 1862, 
buried at Mount Jerome, Dublin. 





. daa.(^ TroililS XTbwiok, G.E. Lydia'Mary, Samuel, Elisabeth, Jonathan, 

TTimter, b. Deo. 12, 1827, b. Deo. 9, 1829, b. Apr. 7, 1832, b. Mar. 22, 1884. b. Dec. 16, 1836, 

r^ .0 isii, at Louisyille, 

^ Vl8 g. Kentucky, U.S.A. 



Edwabd Jokvb 
Ubwigk, M.A., 


XSinor Giaoe Alfred HawlOT 
b. Apr 22, 1889, b Oct. 80, 1870, 

^Ml'Oito^ b. Beo. 27, 1866. Wadham Coll., Oxford, d. Joly 26,' 1874. d. July 29, 1874. 


b. June 20, 1867. 




'Elizabeth Erans, 

d. oirc. 1830 
ar lAandrindio. 

.^n.jCar.3 '* 



b. 1814, Lewis, 

Welshpool, d. 1869. 

Tkoxas TJBWiaK,=Mary^ Ann Timms, 

b. 1821, d. Oct. 20, 1872, 
at Stow-on-ihe-Wold. 




m. Oct. 10, 1849. 




TkoililsLkwibIJ., Frances Wilxiax Saxuxl TJ., And others 
b. 1868. Ellen. b. 1864. departed this life. 


b. 1764, 
d. 1782. 

WxxxiAX UBWXOK,»Elizabe 

of Broom, owner of 
C^wsmoor, d. 1793. 

m. Ma} 


I I I • " 1 

Ann, WxLUAM UBWioK,=Mai^, dan. of Pritchard=THO]iAfi UBWios,=Maddox. Elizil. 

Squire Smith, 
of Buokton Pork. 

b. 1766, of Growsmoor and 
d. 1846. Walfoid, 

b. 1767, d. 1861. 

JoHH ITbwicix,«» Ann^ dan. of 
of Growsmoor, 
b. 1817. 


Bi. Roberta, 
b. 1819, m. 1844, 
d. 1868. 

of London, I 
b, 1769, d. 1826. I 

Thomaa Maddox U., 
d. a bachelor. 

b. 17 

JohnRoDertsU., Richard IT., Frances =» Thomaa 
b. 1846, d. 1891. b. 1846, Elizabeth, Griffiths. 

d. 1867. b. 1848, 
d. 1880. 

WiLUAicE.U.,«= Emma 

b. Jan. 14, 1860. 

I. 1853, 
d. 1869. 

Ri. Henry, Albert W., Mabel Helen, Emma Grace, ^ 
b. 1876. b. 1877. b. 1878. b. 1881. 

Edwards, b. 1852, 
m. Mar. 30, d. 1867. 



John Fowi 



b. Feb. 16, 1826, 
of Glapham. 

Mary,=Rev. H. T. CaveU, Sakubl .Tohw Uewick.=Ho1( 

Gatherine, b. Nov. 26, vicar of Staverton, 
dau. of F. J. 1826. Wilts. 

Ridsdale, of 
Gray's Inn. 

b. Nov. 16, 1828, 
of Gt. Malvern. 



William. FBAVOissBFlorenoe, uanon 

Ubwick, dan. of Gatharine. 

b. Sept. 28, 1869. Wentworth 


Beatrice. Graoe^Tavemer Emma Hugh X)q 

B.Miller. Jane. StamlbtXT., Hid^; 

b. July 7, b. J 



Hbnbt trBWiGK,=Anni8, 


icn % 

b. May 6, 


of Worcester. 


dau. of Gatherine, -^ 
Lyndall b. Aug. \i 
Whitby, 28, 1860. 
of Yeovil. 
Lyndall Fownes Urwiok, 
b. Mar. 3, 1891. 

HE Parish of Clungunford). 

izabeih AmiBS, 
. May 29. 1763, 
d. 1810. 

'.lizal>eth,=G^. Saondere. 
b. 1771. 



Margaret, John UBWiOK,»Ursiila Dean, Rzghabd, Ghajkles, 

b. 1774. 8o}iooba[ia8ter 
Brick House, 
b. 1776, d. 1831. 


m. Jan. 3, b. 1778, b. 1782, 
1808. d. 1797. d. 1841. 

i I I 

:alM'th CHABLic8U.,»»Enima Mary 




b. 1854. 


Davies, Hele^, Ann, 

m. 1884. b. 1869. b. 1862, 

d. 1885. 


Winifred, Frank, Kathleen, Barbara, 
b. 1885. b. 1886. b. 1889. b. 1890. 

Mary,— WzLLiAX XJBWiaK,»Eli2abeth, 

dan. of 

of London, 
b. 1796, d. 1860. 

dan. of Edward 
Walker, of Kington. 


ElizabethsaBey. John Mair =»FBKDBBiGK='Florenoe 
Anne. Salwey, Mappin. Ubwios, Gibbs. 
Y. of Brozbome. b. July 14, 1841. 


=Holen Jane, dau. of Thoilub Ai7auBTn8=Elizabeth 

Henry Chamberlain, Uewick, 
of Woroeater. b. Feb. 10, 1830, 

d. June 25, 1890. 

Edwabd UBWiOK,sBHannah, dau. of 

Anne (see 
Urwicks of the 
Moor), d. 1892. 

b. Apr. 26, 

Gapt. Beebee. 


I I 

Lucy. BiOBABD, Catharine. 

b. Dec. 26, 1868. 



b. Jan. 24, 




b. Feb. 27, 


b. Oct. 24, b. May 9, b. Apr. 8, 

1873. 1876. 1879. 

=Rev. Aaron Mary Wax/tkb Jessie, Abthur Christine 

Lewis Fownes, Chaicbxrlaxn b. Kov. 23, JomcU., Agnes, 

Manby. b. Apr. 10, Ubwigk, 
1862. b. Deo. 17, 




b. Apr. 22, b. Dec. 26, b. Aug. 19, 




(IV.) URW] 

BnrjAimr U 



b. 11 Nov.. 1798, 
d. 19 Oct., 1834. 

Rfmiifcp UKWiOK,»Eliza Meredith, 
of Walton, I m. 16 Deo., 1796. 
Old Badnor. 

of KexmiDgiony 

b.U Dec., 1800, 
d. 26 8^., 1882. 


b. and d. 


Edwabd U.,=s 
of Presteign, 
b.l8 Jan., 1804, 
d. 1871. 




b. 1806, 
d. 1829. 

■ I I 

RTHWAwn BRHJJL¥nnBFlorenoe Ellen, Edwabd EUxabethaiThomaa Angostt 

Ubwxok, Ubwzok, Manley. d. aged Ubwiok, Anne, Urwick. 

no iamie. Paymaster 29. New York. b. Jan. 6, 

to the 1841. 

WlMt B.N. 


Saxxtel 1 
b. Oct. J 
d. Jan. ] 

Oatharinea^Thomas Weyman 
b. Feb. 10, 1820, Clemgonas, 

m. Feb. 3, 1852. Bromlej, Kent. 

Saiotbl Walkbb 1 

b. Nov. 3. 18 

of LonK Leintl 

now of Heref < 



b. Aug. 1, 1850. 



b. 1851. 




b. 1854. 


b. 1855. 




Bdjabb Umif-the daughter of Tho6. and 

Jane Oollizui, 



m. 1766. 

Edwabd VvwiOK, 
of the Moor and 
of Felhami 

, I 

jjntf, BruohU., 

b.l806, rfSminghain, 

d 18-29. b.llJ»n.,1811. 


m. Howard 


b. 1813, 
d. 1829. 


b. 1816, 
d. 1829. 


Edwabd U.," 

of Felton, 

near Ludlow, 

twice m., 

no iBsne 


WiZXIAX U.,=s 

of Ludlow Castle, 
d. 1870, aged 72. 

RzoHABD U. ,BsGharlotte, 

of Felhampton, 

d. 6 Bee., 1869, 

aged 68. 

d. Id May, 1874, aged 65, 
both buried at Bichard's 
Castle, near Ludlow. 

Haiy Letitla»»Bey. Alfred a daiighter«sBeY. W. Y. Foot. 

V. of Bothamsall, Notts. 

F BECKJAYfiN THE Parish of Clungunford). 

m. Apr. Id, 1819, 
d. 0(tt. 22, 1860. 

rr ' — nstitfi'=Kate, dau. of 
^^«^ Rev. T.Lewis, 
''» Clungunford. 

William Walksb UswiOKy^Fanny, dau. of 


b. Apr. 14, 1825, 

St. George's Road, 


m. Oct. 19, 1854, at Clungunford. 

I I 

Elizabeth, Charles, 
departed this life. 

b. 1860. 




b. 1863. 


Fanny. WzllllkXJ., Kate. 
of Newquay, Cornwall, 
d. 1886. 


Anne = Capt. 

Isabel, Horton, 

m. Feb. 28, 1884. 

List of Works from which the Records of the Urswicks 

have been drawn. 

History of I^ncashire .... by Baines. 
History of Lancashire .... by Nicolson and Burn. 
History of Cumberland and Westmoreland, by Nicolson and Bum. 
History of Cheshire .... by Chauncy. 
History of Cheshire .... by Ormerod. 

History of Essex by Elizabeth Ogbome. 

History of Ludlow .... by Thomas Wright. 

History of South Yorkshire ... by Hunter. 

History of Whalley .... by Whitaker. 

History of Richmondshire ... by Whitaker. 

History of London .... by Allen. 

Fragments of Lancaster ... by Gregson. 

Materials for a history of Hen. VH., by Rev. William Campbell, M. A. 

Works on Heraldry, by Burke, Berry, Boutell, Edmondson, Papworth, &c. 

Judges of England, by Edward Foss. 

Antiquities of Fumess, by Thomas West. 

Annates Furnesienses, by T. Alcock Beck. 

Longstaife's Richmondshire. 

Longstaife's Heraldic Visitations. 

Life of Erasmus, by Dr. Knight. 

Funeraf Monuments, by Weever. 

Sepulchral Monuments, 'by Gough. 

Berry's County Genealogist. 

Nichols' Herald and Genealogist. 

Dr. Marshall's Genealogist. 

State Papers of Henry VIH. 

Papers of Chatham Society, 8120. 

Orridge's Citizens of London. 

Annals of Cartmel, by James Stockdale. 

Catterick Church, by James Raine, sen. 


LIST OF W0BK8, ETC. 226 

History of Aginconrt, by Sir Nicholas Harris Nicolas. 
History and Antiquities of Windsor Castle, by Joseph Pote. 
Works of Morant, Dngdale, &c. 

Ancient Calendars, — as Inquis. Post-mortem, Rotulorum Patentium, and 
Dncatns Lancastriae. 

Cambridge Camden Society's Illustrations of Monumental Brasses, Aca- 
demies 5625/16. 

Harleian MSS., Nos. 891, 1137, 1420, 1468, 1541, 1549, 2076, 2086, and 6159. 

Additional MSS., Nos. 143 11, 2445 1» 24458, 24512, 24468 and 70, 30327. 

Sloane MSS. Seals XXXII. 51, ist Hen. VI. 

Records and references furnished by James Rusby, Esq., F.R.H.S., of 18, 
Oppidan*s Road, Regent's Park, and by Mr. Joseph Eedes, of 2, George 
Street, Euston Road, Professor of Heraldry. 

Lyson's Environs of London. 

Newcourt's Repertorium Ecclesiasticum. 

Robinson's History of Hackney. 

Lord Bacon's Life of Henry VII. 

Wm. Simpson's Memorials of Hackney Church. 

Rymer's Foedera. 

Many very interesting old Postmortem Inquisitions, &c.. Chancery Suits, &c., 
were presented by the late John Robert Daniel Tyssen, of 9, Lower 
Rock Gardens, Brighton. 
This list, with probably some omissions, only includes those works or 

documents in which materials have been found, and does not include many 

others, which have been perused in vain.